"Sick too often - out of a job?" Court confirms dismissal despite medical certificate

When short-term sickness is powerless against dismissal

Many people believe that as long as a certificate is on the table, their job is safe. But a recent ruling by the Mainz Higher Labor Court shows that this is not the case: Being frequently ill - even for a short time - can cost you your job in the long term. Even if the days of absence are medically certified.

The case involved a logistics employee who missed a whopping 166 working days between 2020 and the beginning of 2023. The reasons: from colds and mental health problems to the late effects of a heart attack. A colorful mix of diagnoses - but no clear plan on how to get better.

BEM? Yes, but without result

The company attempted to find solutions through company integration management (BEM). The aim of such discussions is actually to maintain the job - for example by making adjustments or reducing the workload. But the employee refused: No need, no measures, no problem - that was his attitude.

The employer took a different view. From his point of view, everything spoke in favor of a negative health prognosis - i.e. the assumption that the employee would continue to be absent regularly in the future. This is not only difficult for companies to organize, but also expensive. After all, the employer continues to pay wages for up to six weeks per year in the event of illness - in this case, it was significantly more.

So the company pulled the ripcord - ordinary termination with notice.

Court: Dismissal justified - despite sick leave

Initially, the labor court saw the matter differently and ruled in favor of the employee. However, on appeal, the Mainz Regional Labor Court ruled in favor of the employer. Its reasoning: The large number of different illnesses - often unclearly diagnosed - was sufficient for a valid negative health prognosis. And: The employee was unable to refute this assessment.

Even if the BEM was "formally not entirely clean" from the point of view of the first instance, the Regional Labor Court saw no connection between the BEM errors and the dismissal. The dismissal was therefore declared effective.

Decision is a warning shot - for both sides

For employees, the decision shows: Anyone who is frequently ill must actively address the situation - preferably in close cooperation with the employer. Simply waiting and refusing every measure can end up costing you your job. And yes - certificates do not protect against the reality of the workplace.

At the same time, we should ask ourselves: where is the human factor? 166 days of absence in three years - that can also be an expression of a serious health crisis. Termination as a solution? That seems harsh.

Anyone who is ill needs support - not dismissal. But anyone who refuses any help should not be surprised when trust dwindles. Employers should help - but they don't have to stand by and watch forever.