First diseases caused by the Coronavirus have been confirmed. The disease spreads in this country, for companies and employees a number of employment law questions. It is, among other things, the duty of care, the need to perceive the company. For this reason, various international groups have already reacted and no longer send their people in areas with a high risk of infection.

A company is obliged to protect the health of its employees, says labor lawyer Roger Rudolph, Professor at the University of Zurich. At work on the construction machines, there are accepted Standards. So employees get, for example, depending on the activity, protective equipment.

In the case of justified refusal of work, the wage is owed, however.

Marc Prince, labour law expert at Vischer attorneys in Zurich, announced a series of measures that companies must implement, if the width of the population infect the parts with the Coronavirus. Particularly exposed employees, who have a lot of customer contact, are specially designed to protect. This, for example, with breathing masks or plexiglass between you and the clientele. It is the task of the company to inform the employees and to raise awareness of hygiene issues and to sanction in case of non-compliance with the legislation. Information for washing your hands and the should provide of the use of disinfectants is expected. Possibly will be done without shaking the hands, and joint meetings could be replaced by telephone or video conferencing.

No 100-percent protection

As Marc Prince also points Roger Rudolph to the fact that the measures of the threat will depend. How these developed in Switzerland, is currently still unclear. Also, regardless of the threat situation, there is room for interpretation. "Companies do not have to be every theoretically conceivable risk only – it is the Necessary, technically Feasible, and subject to modifications required," explains Roger Rudolph.

No room for interpretation there, if a governmental authority shall issue specific orders, which in the case of a pandemic in a certain Region. The associated duty of care should implement a company strictly. Employers and employees assess the risk differently, the companies often have the leverage. "In the labour law, the principle applies: No work, no pay," says Marcel Steinegger, a lawyer at the law firm of Froriep in Zurich. Alone the fear of being infected in the workplace, is not the reason of staying away from work. A company could interpret this as an unfounded refusal to work, and impose disciplinary measures, up to termination without notice, take.

In the case of a justified refusal of work is due to the wage, however. That would be the case, for example, if a company is in breach of its duty of care by implementing measures at the workplace, lack of protection, the risk of contagion to contain, such as Marcel Steinegger explained. This is especially true when a company orders from state authorities and disregarded. An employee no longer would have to admonish the company, before he appears to work. Also a business trip in an area with a high threat situation can refuse workers with good reason – whereby in this point of interpretation.

the employer May, conversely, also prohibit a private holiday trip? For Roger Rudolph, the would be no more than conceivable, if the journey leads to a high risk area such as, for example, individual regions in China. Really to enforce such a ban, however. The employee should be expected, however, that he will no longer be employed after his return because of the risk posed, and because of itself does not pay fault get.

stay In quarantine?

The Federal office for public health publishes on its website under "frequently asked questions" the following requirement: "Therefore, persons who had close contact with diseased persons (less than two meters distance is more than 15 minutes), you need to stay in the so-called quarantine at home." According to Marcel Steinegger, but that is neither a public call nor an individual arrangement. A close contact to a sick Person does not justify, therefore, automatically an absence from the workplace.

Marcel Steinegger advises, in such a case, not only with the doctor, but also with the superiors and cases, a joint decision. Usually it is in the interest of the company, that the risk of infection is not worn to the workplace. If possible, is likely to win in a further spread of the Coronavirus, the work at home temporarily in importance. Also in the home office, however, applies: The employer must approve.

there is a conflict with the employer, you are not guaranteed job security, even in the case of a justified refusal. "In the case of a termination without notice, the court decides around one to two years later, whether this was justified," noted labor lawyer Roger Rudolph. If a court subsequently confirmed an unjustified termination, you can expect the Affected person to compensation. In General, companies will have to pay a penalty payment of two to three months ' wages.

If the school fails

When the Virus is in Switzerland, the spread would be based on the epidemics law in Switzerland, school closures possible. To contain the disease, would have to stop in such a case, to be consistent, also nursery care temporarily. For working parents, who find in the short term is no substitute for care, it would be a Problem. Here, too, there is legal room for interpretation. According to the estimates of Professor Roger Rudolph, it is conceivable that in this case, the same rules apply as in the case of a disease of the child.

That would mean: father or mother must ensure a few days of home care until a replacement is organised. Wherein as a rule of thumb, up to three days are possible. However, the labour court of Zurich had decided a few years ago in a manger closure during the swine flu, that there is no entitlement to salary continuation was payment, if the mother care for the children yourself and that is why the work must remain.

Created: 01.03.2020, 21:39 PM