Decision on the Applicability of the Generally Binding Collective Labour Agreement for the Metal Industry

Facts

[A.] (Plaintiff) was employed as a fitter at [X. AG] (Defendant) from mid-June 1997 to the end of June 1999. After the termination of the employment relationship, the trade union asserted on behalf of the Plaintiff that he had not been paid the 13th month's salary, had been granted too few holidays, and had not been paid for overtime, in violation of the generally binding Collective Labour Agreement for the Metal Industry (LGAV Metallgewerbe). The Defendant refused the subsequent payment, arguing that it was not subject to the LGAV Metallgewerbe.

The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen dismissed the claim, as it did not consider the Defendant's business to be subject to the LGAV Metallgewerbe. The Plaintiff appealed against this judgment to the Federal Supreme Court.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court confirmed the judgment of the Cantonal Court. It stated that the decisive factor for the applicability of the LGAV Metallgewerbe is whether the Defendant is in direct competition with the companies involved in the CLA. However, the Federal Supreme Court did not consider the installation of blinds and sun protection systems,…