The Landesarbeitsgericht Baden-Württemberg (LAG Baden-Württemberg, Higher Labour Court of Baden-Württemberg) awarded a female employee partially higher remuneration for the years 2018 to 2022 (LAG Baden-Württemberg, decision of 18 August 2026 – 2 Sa 14/24). Although the claimant cannot demand full pay parity with a specifically named male colleague, she is entitled to the difference between her remuneration and the median pay of the male comparator group at the same level of the company hierarchy.
Dispute over equal pay for work of equal value
Men and women are entitled to equal pay for equal work or work of equal value. If a female employee receives lower remuneration than a male colleague performing equal work or work of equal value, this generally gives rise to a presumption that the disadvantage is based on sex.
In the case at issue, the claimant sought higher remuneration from her employer retroactively in respect of several pay components. She based her claims on the Entgelttransparenzgesetz (German Pay Transparency Act) and the general principle of equal treatment.
Claimant’s primary and alternative claims
The claimant’s demands were based on two different standards of comparison:
- Primarily, she sought pay parity with a specific male colleague.
- In the alternative, she claimed the difference between her remuneration and the median pay of the male comparator group at the same hierarchical level.
- With regard to virtual shares, she alternatively claimed the difference between her allocation and the benefits granted on average to employees of all sexes in her comparator group.
The median pay was shown in a pay transparency dashboard on the employer’s intranet. During the period from 2018 to 2022, the colleague specifically named by the claimant received significantly more than the median pay of the male comparator group at the same hierarchical level.
Employer’s objections to the claims
The employer disputed that the claimant and the named colleague performed equal work or work of equal value. It also argued that the colleague had worked at the relevant hierarchical level for a considerably longer period.
The employer further attributed the differences in remuneration to performance deficiencies on the claimant’s part. It also contended that the colleague’s salary data had been unlawfully taken from lists made available to the works council for the performance of its duties. It argued that these data should therefore be inadmissible in the legal proceedings.
No entitlement to the named colleague’s remuneration
The Landesarbeitsgericht upheld the claim only in part. It denied that the claimant was entitled to the same remuneration as the specifically named male colleague.
Presumption rebutted in this comparison
For the purposes of its assessment, the court assumed both that the salary data were admissible and that the work was of equal value, as well as that a presumption of sex-based discrimination existed. Nevertheless, the court held that the employer had rebutted this presumption in relation to the named colleague.
Considered as a whole, the decisive factors were:
- the remuneration structure within the male comparator group; and
- the colleague’s considerably longer period of service at the relevant hierarchical level.
In the Landesarbeitsgericht’s assessment, these circumstances indicated that the specific pay difference was not based on the claimant’s sex. The claimant was therefore not awarded the difference between her remuneration and this colleague’s higher salary.
Entitlement to the difference from median pay
The court reached a different conclusion when comparing the claimant’s remuneration with the median pay of the male employees at the same hierarchical level. In this respect, the employer failed to rebut the presumption of sex-based discrimination.
The claimant is therefore entitled, for the period covered by the action, to the difference between the remuneration she actually received and the median pay of the male comparator group. The successful part of her claim is thus limited to this standard of comparison and does not extend to the remuneration of the specifically named colleague.
Separate assessment of virtual shares
For the virtual share component of the remuneration, the Landesarbeitsgericht applied the general principle of equal treatment. Accordingly, the claimant may demand the difference between her allocation and the benefits granted on average to employees of all sexes in her comparator group.
This entitlement is also limited to the relevant remuneration component and the standard of comparison determined by the court. It does not result in full pay parity with the named male colleague.
New decision following remittal
The judgment had been preceded by proceedings before the Bundesarbeitsgericht (BAG, Federal Labour Court). By judgment of 23 October 2025, it had set aside the Landesarbeitsgericht’s initial decision of 1 October 2024 and remitted the case (BAG, judgment of 23 October 2025 – 8 AZR 300/24).
Following the remittal, the Landesarbeitsgericht reheard the case on 14 July 2026. The appellate proceedings were concluded by the decision handed down on 18 August 2026. The Landesarbeitsgericht did not grant leave to appeal on points of law to the Bundesarbeitsgericht.
Importance of the comparator group in equal pay cases
The decision illustrates that different levels of comparison can lead to different outcomes. A female employee may be unsuccessful in seeking pay parity with a specific male colleague yet still partially succeed if her remuneration is below the median pay of the relevant male comparator group.
The decisive issue remains whether the employer can rebut, for each relevant comparison, the presumption of sex-based discrimination arising from the difference in remuneration. The specific pair being compared, the remuneration structure of the comparator group and the reasons put forward by the employer must each be assessed separately.
Companies and employees with questions concerning equal pay, the Entgelttransparenzgesetz or the enforcement and defence of remuneration-related claims may contact MTR Legal Rechtsanwälte for employment law advice.
