In its decision 9 ObA 4/26t, the Supreme Court (OGH) clarified that there is no entitlement to parental part-time work if a father has flexible working hours and ‘merely’ requests a change in the timing of his working hours (but not a change in the number of hours worked).

Parental part-time work for fathers is regulated in Sections 8 et seq. of the VKG. These provisions largely correspond to those governing parental part-time work for mothers and are intended to enable fathers to adjust their working hours to better care for their children.

In addition to reducing working hours to part-time employment, Section 8h of the VKG allows for a change in the timing of working hours, i.e. setting different or more flexible working hours without reducing the total number of hours.

The claimant was an employee with complete freedom, granted by contract, to organise his working hours. He was a senior employee within the meaning of the Working Hours Act. Under the heading of parental part-time work, he requested that he be allowed to set fixed working hours in future, without reducing the number of hours worked.

The Supreme Court ruled that in this case there is no entitlement to parental part-time work. The rationale behind the regulations on parental part-time work is to make working hours more flexible for employees in order to facilitate the care of their child. In the Supreme Court’s view, this purpose is negated if the employee already has complete freedom in organising their own time. The protection against dismissal sought by the claimant is not an end in itself.

If you have any questions, the KWR Employment Law Team will be happy to assist you.