Formal defects in working time agreements did not render them invalid
On 17 June 2026, an industrial arbitration tribunal issued an award in a case concerning the validity of a company's agreements on variable weekly working time under the Soil and Concrete Collective Agreement (Jord- og Betonoverenskomsten).
The case arose from a summary dismissal dispute, in which questions were raised regarding the working time agreements the company had used for a group of Polish employees.
The employees' side argued that the employees should be paid in accordance with the collective agreement's ordinary provisions because the working time agreements failed to meet the requirements of the collective agreement. In particular, valid written agreements were missing for parts of the relevant period, some agreements were not signed until after they had taken effect, and the work had not been performed in accordance with the working time agreements.
On the contrary, the employer's side argued that the agreements complied with the requirements of the collective agreement and that the employees had worked in accordance with the working time agreements. The employer did, however, acknowledge that, in a few instances, written agreements were missing or had only been signed after the beginning of the relevant period, but maintained that this was due to practical circumstances such as illness, holidays and time off in lieu.
The working time agreements were held to be valid
The chair of the arbitration tribunal found that the agreements on variable weekly working time satisfied the requirements of the collective agreement. Emphasis was placed on the fact that the substance of the agreements complied with the collective agreement and that the evidence demonstrated that the employees had worked according to the agreed rotation schedule.
The chair further held that the requirement for a written agreement constituted a condition for validity. However, based on the evidence, it could be established that the company had continuously entered into written agreements on variable weekly working time with the employees, even though not every agreement could be produced. The missing agreements, the agreements signed after the relevant period had commenced, and minor deviations from the agreed working time pattern were not considered sufficiently serious to invalidate the entire arrangement.
Accordingly, the chair rejected the employees' claim for overtime pay. However, the company was ordered to pay approximately DKK 1 million because it had scheduled time off in lieu on public holidays in breach of the collective agreement.
Littler comments
The award demonstrates that minor formal defects in agreements on variable weekly working time do not, in themselves, render such agreements invalid. The decisive factors are whether the agreements comply with the substantive requirements of the collective agreement and whether the employees have worked in accordance with the agreed arrangement.
The award is also of particular interest because the chair confirmed that a written agreement is a condition for entering into a working time agreement under the collective agreement, while at the same time accepting that the existence of such agreements may be established by evidence other than the production of the signed working time agreements themselves.
Littler | Denmark advises contractors, developers, and other participants in the construction industry on the employment and labor law issues that arise in connection with medium-sized and large construction projects. The construction industry is characterized by a complex collective bargaining system and a wide range of industry-specific rules. At Littler, we have in-depth knowledge of the employment and labor law challenges that may arise in connection with construction projects, and we always provide practical, commercially focused advice.
You can read more about our advice on the rules governing health and safety at work, workplace risk assessments (WRAs) and employers' health and safety obligations in the workplace here.
Disclaimer: The above is not, and cannot be, a substitute for legal advice.
Reference to the award (FV2025-1313):
https://pro.karnovgroup.dk/b/documents/7001033386
Bo Enevold Uhrenfeldt
Attorney & Partner
+45 44 14 30 90
