Facts
[A.] concluded an oral employment contract with company X. AG. In December 1997, [A.] sent two letters to an American licensing company of X. AG in which he described X. AG as a disorganized company, run by unprofessional small businessmen, on the verge of bankruptcy and trying to conceal its financial situation from the licensing company. X. AG dismissed [A.] with immediate effect on 30 December 1997.
[A.] subsequently filed a claim with the District Court of Arlesheim for payment of his unpaid salary and compensation for unfair dismissal. The District Court dismissed the claim. [A.] appealed. On appeal, he reduced his salary claim but maintained his claim to obtain a detailed work certificate.
Considerations
According to Art. 330a CO, the worker may demand from the employer a work certificate that pronounces on the nature and duration of the employment relationship as well as on his performance and conduct (para. 1). Upon the express request of the worker, the certificate may be limited to information on the nature and duration of the employment relationship (para. 2).
The doctrine is unanimous in stating that the employer can only issue a simplified work certificate within the meaning of para. 2 if the worker expressly requests it. The worker has the choice to request a qualified work certificate (comprehensive certificate) or a simplified certificate (work attestation). A simplified certificate issued against his will can be refused by the worker.
The worker who opts for a comprehensive work certificate does…