Leipzig labour court denies €96 Saturday wage claim as extra work and nonpayment remain unproven

The labour court in Leipzig denied Nele Hartwig’s claim for €96 gross against Falkenblatt Haushaltswaren GmbH for six Saturday hours at an undisputed rate of €16 an hour. It found that the record did not prove either that Saturday was additional work or that the claimed wages remained unpaid. No payment or other relief was ordered.

The dispute turned on whether a Saturday shift added to Hartwig’s usual Wednesday work or replaced it. The court did not find that she had agreed to a swap or taken Wednesday off. Its denial rested instead on gaps in the evidence supporting her claim.

The employer’s revised roster was presented as an exhibit. It marked Hartwig off on Wednesday and scheduled her for Saturday from 10:00 to 16:00. That supported a planned swap, but the document contained no acknowledgment from her and no record of when she had seen it. It could not establish that the change was communicated, accepted or followed.

Hartwig’s account that she worked Wednesday was not contradicted by an employer attendance record or firsthand account. But the court distinguished an assertion made in submissions from a produced record or admitted witness testimony.

That distinction also applied to the documents described on her behalf. A portal PDF reportedly recorded six hours on each day under her employee number, while a saved message exchange reportedly contained the Saturday coverage request and her reply. Neither document was presented for assessment, so the court could not verify their contents or context.

Payment presented a separate gap. The employer acknowledged that it had no accounting showing whether the Saturday hours had been paid. The court treated that as an absence of records, not proof of nonpayment. No pay stub, bank record or other payment evidence was presented. Although the €96 calculation was clear, Hartwig still had to establish that the sum was owed; no smaller unpaid amount was proved either.

Hartwig maintained that she worked both shifts and received only her normal wages. Her side argued that no cancellation of Wednesday had been communicated and that her brief acceptance of the Saturday request did not mean she agreed to forgo additional pay.

The employer sought denial of the claim, or an award limited to any amount proved additional and unpaid. It relied on the roster but accepted that it did not establish Hartwig’s agreement or actual absence on Wednesday. It also said it could not independently confirm the described portal PDF and had no further records resolving payment.

The claim arose from a manager’s request that Hartwig cover a six-hour Saturday shift. Her case was that she also worked her usual six hours on Wednesday that week, making Saturday additional paid work.

The judgment leaves that factual dispute unresolved. It establishes neither that Hartwig missed Wednesday nor that the employer paid for Saturday. The decisive limit was what the parties actually placed before the court, rather than what they said other documents would show.