Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
11 09 96 • KG LU 11 09 96 Généré par l'IA

Hospitality Manager Overtime Compensation Denial

Numéro de cause 11 09 96
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Lucerne (CH-LU)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The court affirmed that the national collective bargaining agreement for the hospitality industry applied to a restaurant manager because, despite significant operational responsibility for areas like staffing and purchasing, the employee lacked ultimate decision-making authority in essential company matters, thus not qualifying as an executive exempt under the agreement. Furthermore, the court denied the claim for compensation for overtime, reasoning that although the employer failed to keep mandated time records, the employee was obligated to report unrequested overtime promptly to the employer, especially given the lack of formal time tracking, and the employee failed to provide sufficient proof of continuously recorded and reported overtime hours.

Regeste Legislator

Officiel

Art 321c OR; Art. 1 Abs. 1, 2 und 21 L-GAV des Gastgewerbes. Anwendbarkeit des Landes-Gesamtarbeitsvertrages des Gastgewerbes (L-GAV) auf die Tätigkeit eines Restaurantleiters. Anzeigepflicht des Arbeitnehmers für Überstunden, die der Arbeitgeber nicht angeordnet hat. | OR (Obligationenrecht)

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
indemnisation des heures supplémentaires convention collective de travail certificat de travail droit des obligations notification de la décision contrat de restauration

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 321c OR
The court uses this article to reference the general employment law regarding overtime and employee notification obligations, which informs the application of the L-GAV regarding overtime.
Art. 1 Abs. 1 L-GAV
Used to confirm that the employer's business was generally subject to the L-GAV.
Art. 2 L-GAV
Used to determine whether the plaintiff, as a restaurant manager, was excluded from the scope of the L-GAV.
Art. 21 Abs. 2 L-GAV
Art. 21 Abs. 3 L-GAV
Art. 21 L-GAV
This provision regarding the employer's duty to keep records of working hours influenced the court's decision regarding the employee's obligation to report overtime.

Jurisprudence citée

Généré par l'IA
BGE 126 III 337
Employee Overtime Compensation and Mandatory Labor Law Protections
BGE 129 III 171
Former Tourism Director's Overtime Compensation Claim Upheld Against Forfeiture Ruling
Généré par l'IA
11 08 84
Gastronomy Overtime Dispute: Employee Records Upheld Against Employer's Late Counter-Evidence
11 02 169
Employee Overtime Wages Appeal: Failure to Dispute Evidence Upheld
1C 11 4
Employer's Claim for Negative Hours and Unearned Vacation Repayment Upheld
JSD 2011 16
Hospitality Establishment's Appeal of Partial Denial of Extended Closing Hours Dismissed

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 321c OR

The court uses this article to reference the general employment law regarding overtime and employee notification obligations, which informs the application of the L-GAV regarding overtime.

Art. 21 L-GAV

This provision regarding the employer's duty to keep records of working hours influenced the court's decision regarding the employee's obligation to report overtime.

Art. 1 Abs. 1 L-GAV

Used to confirm that the employer's business was generally subject to the L-GAV.

Art. 2 L-GAV

Used to determine whether the plaintiff, as a restaurant manager, was excluded from the scope of the L-GAV.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

Rechtsprechung Luzern

Instanz: · Obergericht

Abteilung: · I. Kammer

Rechtsgebiet: · OR (Obligationenrecht)

Entscheiddatum: · 19.01.2010

Fallnummer: · 11 09 96

LGVE: · 2010 I Nr. 16

Leitsatz: · Art 321c OR; Art. 1 Abs. 1, 2 und 21 L-GAV des Gastgewerbes. Anwendbarkeit des Landes-Gesamtarbeitsvertrages des Gastgewerbes (L-GAV) auf die Tätigkeit eines Restaurantleiters. Anzeigepflicht des Arbeitnehmers für Überstunden, die der Arbeitgeber nicht angeordnet hat.

Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.