The Finnish Supreme Court held in its decision rendered on 1 June 2007 (KKO:2007:50) that during an employment relationship an employer and employee can not validly agree upon terms according to which the employee waives rights or benefits provided by the mandatory provisions of the Working Hours Act (605/1996).
The ruling concerned a case where an oral employment contract had been replaced by a written contract during the employment relationship. The employer and the employee agreed in the written contract that, after the signing of the contract, neither of the parties would have any claims against each other in respect of or in relation to the employment relationship for the time prior to the signing of the contract. The employee, however, later claimed compensation for overtime work, Sunday work and weekly rest based on work done prior to the signing of the contract.
The Supreme Court ruled that the employee’s claim concerned benefits provided by the mandatory provisions of the Working Hours Act and, therefore any agreement between the parties reducing such benefits is considered null and void, unless otherwise provided for in the Act. The invalidity of such contract extends to situations where the employee’s waiver of rights has been given in advance as well as to situations where the waiver has been given during the employment relationship.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.