Facts
The appellant [A.] was employed by the respondent [X. AG] as a monthly wage earner. After the termination of the employment relationship, the respondent deducted amounts from the December and January wages as well as the 13th monthly wage, which resulted from the appellant's negative hours in 2005. The appellant then sued for payment of the outstanding wage claims. The lower court considered the wage deduction to be permissible, as the appellant had not protested against the regularly submitted time records and thus the negative hours were considered to be caused by him.Considerations
The Federal Court upheld the decision of the lower court. It stated that the employer is generally not obliged to pay wages insofar as the employee has worked fewer hours than contractually agreed, and this shortfall is not due to the employer's default or an obligation to continue paying wages under Arts. 324a or 324b CO. Since the lower court, based on the assessment of…