Wage gap requirement

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The wage gap rule referred to a statutory regulation in Section 28 (4) SGB ​​XII a that was valid in Germany until December 31, 2010 . F. It stated that the standard rates of social assistance in household communities of married couples with three children (so-called single breadwinner families with three children) remain lower than the monthly average net wages achieved in lower wage groups in a corresponding household community with a single full-time employee. Details on the measurement and structure of the services resulted from the standard rate ordinance of the responsible federal ministers.

In the course of the reorganization of the "Hartz IV" standard requirements by the Standard Requirements Investigation Act (RBEG), Section 28 (4) SGB XII and the Standard Rate Ordinance with effect from January 1, 2011 are no longer applicable.

meaning

The wage gap rule was intended to prevent the structural risk that the standard need for social assistance financed from tax revenues leads to a higher disposable income than the use of one's own labor for full-time work (“Work should be worthwhile.” “Whoever works should have more than someone who doesn't work. ").

It thus puts the (lower) income in relation to the level of tax-financed social benefits and creates a positive incentive to take up work, as this literally "pays off". The extent to which other labor market policy instruments, in particular the sanctioning of not taking up work (see “Criticism” below) are constitutionally, politically or morally justifiable, will not be discussed here.

With a ruling of February 9, 2010, the Federal Constitutional Court had demanded a realistic and transparent regulation through a formal parliamentary law for the derivation and measurement of living social benefits. The regulations valid up to that point did not meet these requirements.

criticism

The Basic Law guarantees a decent subsistence level , but not the payment of a fixed amount of money. Rather, it is a matter for the ordinary legislature to determine and specify this .

The legislature made this specification in the so-called Hartz legislation from 2003 to 2005 and the changes made from 2006, in particular with the amalgamation of unemployment and social assistance to form unemployment benefit II ("Hartz IV").

Part of this legislation, which implemented Agenda 2010 in this respect , was also the consistent expansion of the low-wage sector .

As a result, the wage gap requirement has practically reversed in certain market segments. In many cases, the standard rates there are no longer below the achievable net wages, but, conversely, certain net wages are below the level of the standard rates. In 2010, 1.383 million people in Germany earned so little that they also received unemployment benefit II as so-called top- ups in order to even reach the subsistence level. The “incentive” to take on such low-paid jobs is not least the threat of service cuts by the job center if “reasonable” work is rejected.

It is unclear to what extent the minimum wage of 8.50 euros introduced on January 1, 2015 , can reduce this disparity in the long term. In January and February 2015, the number of top-ups nationwide was lower than in the same month of the previous year, although the decline exceeded the usual seasonal fluctuations according to a spokeswoman for the Federal Employment Agency .

Irrespective of this, the question of whether the legislature determined the standard rates in 2011 in accordance with the constitution and whether these actually secure the “subsistence level”. To this end, there were again examination proceedings pending at the Federal Constitutional Court. In its decision of July 23, 2014, the Federal Constitutional Court described the standard benefits as “currently still constitutional” or “compatible with the reasons [... with the Basic Law].” However, insofar as the actual coverage of existential needs in individual points is doubtful (e.g. Costs for household electricity, mobility and the purchase of durable goods such as refrigerators and washing machines), the legislature has to ensure a sustainable assessment of the standard needs for their upcoming re-determination on the basis of the income and consumption sample 2013.

See also

literature

  • Renate Bieritz-Harder: Live humanely. A contribution to the wage gap requirement of the Federal Social Welfare Act, its history and constitutional problems. Rostocker jurisprudential treatises, Berlin 2001, 302 pp., ISBN 978-3-8305-0214-2 .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. Andreas Pattar: Synopsis SGB XII: Version up to December 31, 2010 and version since January 1, 2011 (PDF; 548 kB)
  2. a b BVerfG, judgment of February 9, 2010, Az. 1 BvL 1/09, full text ("Hartz IV judgment")
  3. ^ Stephan Rixen: Constitutional law replaces social policy? "Hartz IV" put to the test by the Federal Constitutional Court. (PDF; 274 kB)
  4. ↑ The number of Hartz IV supplementers continued to rise. Reuters, May 13, 2011.
  5. Labor market - the minimum wage works. In: Süddeutsche Zeitung , June 21, 2015.
  6. Decision of the Federal Social Court; New Hartz IV sentences are constitutional. In: Süddeutsche Zeitung. July 12, 2012, accessed December 27, 2013 .
  7. 55th Chamber of the Social Court in Berlin: Hartz IV unconstitutional - standard rate is too low by 36 euros. Berlin.de, April 25, 2012, accessed December 27, 2013 .
  8. BVerfG, Rechtsachen Az. 1 BvL 10/12 and 1 BvL 12/12 on the standard rate for adults and young people and Az. 1 BvR 1691/13 on the standard rate for children
  9. Statement of the alliance for a decent subsistence level according to § 27a BVerfGG in proceedings 1 BvG 10/12 and 1 BvG 12/12 with regard to the determination of the standard needs for basic social security. (PDF) In: Menschenwuerdiges-existenzminimum.org. August 12, 2013, accessed on December 7, 2017 (see also Section 27a BVerfGG ).
  10. BVerfG, decision of July 23, 2014, Az. 1 BvL 10/12, 1 BvL 12/12, 1 BvR 1691/13, full text
  11. BVerfG, press release No. 76/2014 of September 9, 2014