The main rule is that all employees have the same employment protection under Norwegian law and there is no legal distinction between blue-collar and white-collar employees.
Nevertheless, the chief executive of a company may waive their protection against wrongful termination and the statutory rules on restrictive covenants in return for severance pay, and employees in leading or particularly independent positions may be exempt from the working hour regulations.
Forms of Employment
The main rule is that employment should be permanent, which implies that:
However, temporary employment is permitted in the following cases:
The regulation on temporary employment is particularly strict in Norway. Should the requirements for temporary employment not be met in respect of a temporarily employed employee, the employee may claim permanent employment with the employer. Employees are also considered permanently employed after three years of continuous temporary employment if the legal basis is work of a temporary nature, work as a temporary substitute or work under the former Section 14-9 (2) litra f) of the Working Environment Act, or any combination of those legal bases.
The Working Environment Act also sets out a presumption of permanent employment where the employment contract does not specify that the employment is temporary nor the legal basis for temporary employment. Temporarily employed employees who have been working for more than six months and completed any probationary period are also entitled to request more predictable and secure working conditions. In such cases, the employer must provide a written and reasoned response within one month of the request.
The Working Environment Act sets out strict restrictions on hiring employees from staffing agencies, which is not permitted for work of a temporary nature (such as temporary increased workloads or projects), and for practical purposes it is only permitted for substitute work (with a few limited exceptions).
Written Employment Contract
The employer must ensure that a written employment contract is entered into as soon as possible, and no later than seven days after commencement of employment if the duration is more than one month (or immediately, if the duration is shorter than one month). Subsequent changes to the terms of employment must be reflected in the employment contract or an addendum to the employment contract as soon as possible, and no later than on the day the change takes effect.
The employment contract must include certain minimum provisions on:
The minimum requirements of the employment contract have been expanded with effect from 1 July 2024. The new minimum requirements do not apply to employment contracts that existed prior to 1 July 2024, but existing employees can request that their employment contract is updated according to the new requirements. In the event of such request, the employer must update the employment contract within two months.
The employment contract must be signed by both parties (digital signatures are acceptable).
If employees work from home, a separate agreement governing working from home must be entered into. Exceptions to the requirement are when working from home happens sporadically or is due to a government order. See 5.1 Mobile Work for further details.
Normal Working Hours
The statutory normal working hours are nine hours per day and 40 hours per week. Employees are entitled to a daily break of at least 30 minutes if they work more than 5.5 hours per day. Different regulations may follow from collective bargaining agreements (CBAs), where the working hours are normally agreed at 7.5 hours per day and 37.5 hours per week.
Overtime
Work exceeding the agreed working hours must not be carried out unless there is a specific and time-limited need for it.
Work exceeding the statutory limits is considered overtime and must be compensated with an overtime supplement of at least 40% per hour. Time off in lieu can be agreed, but the overtime supplement must nevertheless be paid. CBAs will typically include a higher overtime supplement (50–100%) per hour.
Overtime work must not exceed ten hours per seven days, 25 hours per four weeks and 200 hours per year. These limits may, however, be extended by a collective agreement or by approval from the Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority.
Flexibility of Working Hours
It is possible to agree to an average calculation of the normal working hours (with the individual employee, in a CBA or by approval from the Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority) to provide more flexibility to cover peak workloads.
Employees may also be entitled to flexible working hours and reduced working hours (under certain conditions) if this can be arranged without major inconvenience to the employer.
Maximum Working Hours
The total working hours (including overtime hours) shall not exceed 13 hours during 24 consecutive hours or 48 hours during seven consecutive days. The 48-hour limit may be average-calculated over a period of eight weeks.
In addition, employees are entitled to daily and weekly off-duty time. According to the Working Environment Act, employees are entitled to 11 hours of continuous off-duty time per 24 hours. The off–duty period shall be placed between two main work periods. Employees are also entitled to have a continuous off-duty period of 35 hours per seven days. The weekly off-duty time shall include Sundays as far as possible, as the main rule is that work on Sundays is not permitted.
Part-Time Employees
It is stipulated in the Working Environment Act that, as a main rule, employees shall be employed in full-time positions. Before entering into part-time employment agreements, employers are required to document the need for part-time employees. The question of part-time employment must be discussed with the employee representative(s), who shall be provided with documentation from the employer regarding the need for part-time employment.
Working hours for employees in part-time positions must be set out in the employment contract or a work schedule. Part-time employees who regularly work beyond the agreed working hours over a 12-month period are entitled to an increased position, unless the employer can document that the additional work is no longer needed. Part-time employees also have a preferential right to extra shifts and an increased position, including parts of a role.
Employees who work part-time for more than six months with the same employer, and who have completed any probationary period, have the right to request a form of employment with more predictable and secure working conditions. In such cases, the employer must provide the employee with a written and reasoned response within one month after the request.
Exemption From Working Hour Regulations
Leading and particularly independent positions are exempt from the working hour regulations. Whether a position qualifies as being “leading” or “particularly independent” depends on a comprehensive assessment of several factors. The core criterion is that the position in question must have a real and significant degree of independence with respect to how, when and where work is performed. Typically, only a few positions in the company will qualify as leading or particularly independent, and these exemptions should not be applied too extensively.
Minimum Wage
There is no statutory general minimum wage requirement in Norway. Minimum wage is often agreed as part of a CBA and will apply to the employers bound by such agreements. In companies that are not bound by a CBA, salary is based on individual negotiations between the employer and employee. However, wages and terms of employment defined in CBAs have been made generally applicable within certain sectors, which means that the minimum wage requirements agreed in CBAs will apply to all employers within the relevant sector (eg, construction work, cleaning, electro work, agriculture, shipyards, fisheries and transportation). For the purposes of obtaining a work permit, the agreed salary must correspond to the rates in the applicable CBAs or meet certain minimum thresholds for a bachelor/master's degree.
Bonus
It is quite common for employers to offer a bonus scheme, which will typically be based on the achievement of targets relating to company results or individual performance, or a combination thereof.
Government Intervention
The government has prepared regulations that apply to the compensation of certain groups of employees, as follows:
Holiday and Holiday Pay
Pursuant to the Norwegian Holiday Act, employees are entitled to a minimum of four weeks and one day of annual leave. The holiday year runs from 1 January to 31 December, and there is no accrual of holidays throughout the year. It is quite common for employers to offer five weeks of annual leave.
The employer is responsible for determining the holiday and ensuring that employees take their annual leave. Employees are entitled to take three weeks’ consecutive leave during the main holiday season between 1 June and 30 September. Employees who become ill during their employment are entitled to postpone their holiday (with certain requirements), and holiday that the employee has not been able to take will transfer to the following year. If holiday is not taken during the holiday year, the employer may be liable to pay compensation to the employee. The employer and the employee may also agree to transfer two weeks of holiday to the following year, and the employer may only cash out holiday that has not been taken in connection with a termination of employment.
Employees who are absent on holiday receive holiday pay instead of salary. Holiday pay is accrued in the year prior to payment (accrual year) and is based on salary payments (both fixed and variable) paid to the employee in the accrual year.
The holiday pay rate is 10.2% of the employee’s remuneration in the accrual year if the employer offers four weeks and one day of annual leave, and 12% of the employee’s remuneration in the accrual year if the employer offers five weeks of annual leave. The right to take holiday applies regardless of whether or not the employee will be entitled to holiday pay. Although the Holiday Act provides that holiday pay must be disbursed on the last ordinary pay day before the holiday is taken, it is common practice in Norway to include a section in the employment agreement stating that holiday pay is disbursed in lieu of salary in the month of June, regardless of when holiday leave is taken. For the rest of the year, the ordinary monthly salary is paid.
Employees above the age of 60 are entitled to an additional week of annual leave with an increased holiday pay rate of an extra 2.3%.
Statutory Leaves of Absence
Norwegian law provides for a number of paid and unpaid leaves of absence.
Sick leave
Employees are entitled to sick pay for a period of up to 52 weeks (provided that certain minimum tenure requirements are fulfilled). The employer pays sick pay for the first 16 days; thereafter, the sick pay is paid by the Norwegian National Insurance. The sick pay is limited to 6 G (1 G currently equals NOK124,028), but many employers offer to pay the difference between full salary and the sick pay from the National Insurance.
Prenatal examinations
Pregnant employees are entitled to a leave of absence to attend prenatal examinations if such examinations cannot reasonably take place outside working hours. Such leave is paid.
Pregnancy leave
A pregnant employee is entitled to leave of absence for up to 12 weeks during the pregnancy. Such leave is unpaid, but the employee may be entitled to benefits from the National Insurance.
Leave in connection with childbirth/adoption
The co-parent is entitled to two weeks’ unpaid leave in connection with childbirth to assist the mother. Adoptive parents/foster parents are entitled to two weeks’ unpaid leave when taking over responsibility for a child.
Parental leave
Parents are entitled to parental leave for a period of up to 12 months or during such time when parental leave pay is paid from the National Insurance. Employees receive parental leave pay from the Norwegian National Insurance for a period of 49 weeks at a 100% compensation rate, or 59 weeks at an 80% compensation rate. If the child is born after 1 July 2024, employees receive parental leave pay for a period of 61 weeks and one day at an 80% compensation rate. The parental leave pay is limited to 6 G (1 G currently equals NOK124,028), but many employers offer to pay the difference between full salary and the parental leave pay from the National Insurance. At the moment, three weeks are reserved for the mother prior to birth and 15 weeks (19 weeks if opting for the 80% compensation rate) are reserved for both the mother and the co-parent. The parents may freely allocate the remaining 16 weeks between them (20 weeks and one day if opting for the 80% compensation rate).
Additional parental leave
Parents are entitled to take unpaid parental leave immediately in connection with the paid parental leave for a period of up to 12 months.
Nursing mothers
During the child's first year, nursing mothers are entitled to time off with pay to breastfeed a child for a maximum of one hour on workdays with agreed working hours of seven hours or more.
Child’s or childminder’s sickness
Employees are entitled to ten days of annual leave (15 days if the employee has three or more children, and up to 20 days for disabled/chronically ill children) to care for a child if the child or the childminder is sick, until the year the child turns 12 (18 years for disabled/chronically ill children). Additional leave is granted in the case of hospital stays, when the child needs continuous monitoring or has a life-threatening injury or illness. The employee is entitled to similar compensation as during their own sick leave.
Care for close relatives
Employees are entitled to 60 days to nurse close relatives/persons in the home during the terminal stage. Employees are also entitled to up to ten days per year to care for parents or a spouse/partner/disabled or chronically ill child above the age of 18. Such leave is unpaid, but the employee may be entitled to benefits from the National Insurance.
Educational leave
Employees are entitled to educational leave after having been employed for at least three years, and employed by the same employer for the last two years. Such leave is unpaid.
Military service
Employees are entitled to leave in connection with mandatory military or civil service. Such leave is unpaid.
Religious holidays
Employees that have religious holidays other than the Norwegian public holidays are entitled to up to two days of leave per year in connection with religious holidays. As a starting point this leave is paid, but the employer can require employees to make up lost working hours relating to such leave at another time (without additional pay).
Several CBAs also set out additional rights to leave of absence.
Confidentiality
During employment, employees have a duty of confidentiality as part of their duty of loyalty towards the employer. Some categories of employees also have a statutory duty of confidentiality (health personnel, lawyers, priests, etc), and additional provisions on confidentiality are commonly included in the employment contract.
Trade secrets are specifically protected against misuse under the Norwegian Trade Secrets Act, which came into force in January 2021.
Non-disparagement
The duty of loyalty covers non-disparagement requirements to a certain degree. Contractual provisions on non-disparagement are sometimes found in termination agreements, but seldom in employment contracts.
Employee Liability
The employer is liable for damage caused by the employee, either wilfully or negligently, during the performance of work for the employer. Limitations apply if the employee has gone beyond what could reasonably be expected, given the nature of the business or the work.
Pursuant to the Working Environment Act, non-compete and non-solicitation of customer clauses must be agreed between the employer and the employee, and such clauses are subject to mandatory regulations.
An employer may enforce a non-compete obligation if the employer can substantiate that it has a specific need for protection against competitive actions from the employee after termination of employment. Such specific need relates to the protection of business secrets, know-how and other confidential information, and the employer must demonstrate that the employee has had access to such information through their role.
The non-compete obligation may prohibit the employee from taking employment with, starting, running or participating in a competing business for a period of up to 12 months from the expiry of the notice period. The protection would generally be limited to the area in which the employee has worked.
The non-compete undertaking must be made in writing in advance. The employer must also pay consideration to the employee during the restrictive period at least equal to the statutory minimum consideration of 100% of the remuneration (both fixed and variable) up to 8 G (1 G currently equals NOK124,028), and thereafter a minimum of 70% of the remuneration exceeding 8 G. The annual consideration may be capped at 12 G in total, and deductions may be made for other income for up to half of the consideration.
The employer must actively invoke the restrictions within certain time limits (details below) by giving a written statement to the employee. The written statement must outline the employer’s special need for protection, as well as the scope and geographical area of the restrictions. The employee may also request such statement from the employer, at any time during the employment. The written statement must be provided within the following limits:
The written statement must be provided at the employee’s request or upon termination of employment, subject to a short deadline. Failure to meet these criteria will render the non-compete obligation void. The employer’s position in the statement is binding for three months or until the end of the notice period.
The non-compete obligation may not be enforced if the employment is terminated for reasons other than those attributable to the employee, or if the employer has given the employee reasonable grounds to terminate the employment.
The chief executive of the company may waive these rights in return for severance pay. The restrictions imposed on the chief executive must nevertheless be reasonable.
Non-solicitation of Customers
Non-solicitation obligations with regards to customers may prohibit employees from contacting customers for a period of up to 12 months after the expiry of the employment contract. The obligations may only be applied to customers with whom the employee had contact or for whom the employee was responsible during the last 12 months of the employment.
There is no requirement to pay consideration for non-solicitation obligations, but the requirement to actively invoke the restrictions through a written statement applies (see 2.1 Non-competes). The written statement must also identify which customers are covered by the obligation.
Non-solicitation of Employees
Norwegian law does not imply any restrictions on agreements between an employer and an employee with regard to non-solicitation of employees following termination of employment. Nevertheless, such obligations must be reasonable. Agreements between an employer and another undertaking preventing or limiting an employee’s opportunity to take up an appointment in another undertaking are prohibited. Exceptions apply in connection with business transfers, and the employer may enter into an agreement on non-solicitation of employees during the negotiations of such business transfers as well as for a period of up to six months after the completion of such transfer. Such agreements are only valid if the affected employees are informed about the restrictions in writing.
The Norwegian Act on Processing of Personal Information of 2018 (which implements the GDPR) applies to the employment sphere. Additional specific regulations apply with regard to the following, for example:
Citizens from outside the EU/EEA will need a work permit to work in Norway, and may not generally commence work before such permit is granted. Employers who engage employees without the necessary work permits may be penalised with fines or imprisonment.
EU/EEA citizens who intend to work in Norway must register with the police within three months of arrival in Norway. Swedish, Danish, Icelandic and Finnish citizens can work without registering with the police.
Non-EU/EEA citizens must register with the police upon arrival to receive their residence card. The employee cannot commence work before an application for a residence card has been filed. In some cases, non-EU/EEA citizens do not need a residence card if they are going to work in Norway for less than three months.
The Norwegian Work from Home Regulation was originally implemented in 2002; necessary amendments and revisions have since been made to adapt the regulation to a more modern working life. This Work from Home Regulation applies in addition to the requirements set out in the Working Environment Act.
Unless working from home only happens sporadically or due to government orders, the employer and the employee are required to enter into a separate agreement regarding working from home. Such agreements shall include at least the following:
As far as practically possible, the employer is obligedto ensure that the employee has satisfactory working conditions. This includes ensuring that the workplace, work equipment and indoor environment do not cause the employee any physical harm, and that the psychosocial work environment is satisfactory.
Without regard to the statutory leaves of absence described under 1.5 Other Employment Terms (Statutory Leaves of Absence), Norwegian employers are not obliged to grant their employees sabbatical leave. Upon application from an employee, the employer has discretion over whether or not to grant sabbatical leave.
It is an increasing trend in Norway that employers no longer provide individual offices to employees, but rather offer desk sharing in open spaces or group offices. The Working Environment Act does not set out any specific legal requirements with regard to office layouts, but mandates that the physical and psychosocial working environment must be fully satisfactory.
The number of organised employees has been relatively stable over the last ten years, at around 50% of the workforce. It has decreased somewhat since the 1980s and early 1990s. Unions play a significant role in the Norwegian labour market, and it is common for undertakings to be bound by CBAs.
As a main rule, CBAs are not compulsory. To be bound by a CBA, the employers must usually be part of an employers’ organisation (although direct agreement with a trade union is also possible). Normally, at least 10% of the employees must be part of the trade union in order for a CBA to be applicable. If that is the case and the employer is part of an employers’ organisation, then the relevant trade union will be entitled to demand that the employer is bound by a CBA. However, if the trade union does not demand an agreement, the employer will not automatically be bound by a CBA.
Changes and legislation in the employment law area are often the result of three-party collaboration between the government, the main employer’s association and the main unions. The current government has expressed its intention to increase the influence of the trade unions, and several recent legislation changes align with this intention (eg, restrictions on hiring employees from staffing agencies, which can be waived by agreement with representatives from large nationwide trade unions in companies bound by CBAs with such trade unions).
There are several large nationwide trade unions (with LO being the biggest), and most local or company-specific unions have an affiliation with these. The legislation allows the nationwide trade unions, or employers bound by CBAs with such trade unions, to enter into agreements that may deviate quite significantly from the main rules of the Working Environment Act (eg, with regard to working hours).
General
Employers with more than 50 employees have a statutory obligation to consult with employee representatives in matters that may affect the workforce, the terms and conditions of employment, etc. Best practice may also require consultation on other matters. There is no specific statutory obligation to elect employee representatives or a works council for this purpose, so the extent and level of employee representation will vary.
Employee Representatives on the Board of Directors
In limited liability companies, the employees are entitled to elect directors to the company’s board of directors based on the number of employees, as follows:
The employee representatives will be elected by and among the employees, and will serve as ordinary directors on the board of directors for a period of two years.
HSE Representatives
A health and safety representative must be elected in all companies, but companies with fewer than five employees can agree not to elect a health and safety representative.
In companies with 30 employees or more, a working environment committee must be established. The working environment committee consists of representatives from the employer and employee side of the business, and the committee is responsible for discussing health and safety matters.
Union Representation
CBAs generally imply an obligation on the part of employers bound by such agreements to establish local forums for communication and collaboration with union representatives.
Group Level Consultation
With effect from 1 January 2024, in group companies that collectively employ at least 50 employees, the parent company must establish a framework for co-operation, information and discussion between the companies and the employees in the group. The form of co-operation shall be established in consultation with a majority of the employees in the group, or with one or more local trade unions that represent a majority of the employees in the group.
CBAs are entered into between a union on one side and an employer’s association or an employer directly on the other side, and address wages and/or working conditions for employees.
In Norway, CBAs are generally divided into three levels:
CBAs normally apply for a period of two years, and there is a general duty of peace during the term of a CBA, preventing industrial action during such period.
Material Requirements
Terminations under Norwegian law must comply with both material and procedural requirements in order to be valid. The employer must substantiate and document that the requirements have been fulfilled.
A termination of employment initiated by the employer must be objectively justified by reasons relating to the employee (eg, performance or misconduct) or the employer (eg, redundancy).
Termination due to employee performance, etc
Termination based on performance will require that the employee’s performance has, for some time, been of a significantly lower standard than what could reasonably be expected, and that the employee has been given the means and opportunity to improve.
There is great variation in the nature and seriousness of the circumstances relating to the employee that could form the grounds for termination. However, a circumstance relevant for termination does not necessarily sufficiently warrant termination in the individual case and this will depend on, inter alia, the severity and duration of the circumstance, the extent to which warnings have been given, to what extent the employer has communicated its reasonable expectations and contributed to enabling the employee to succeed, etc. Generally, the threshold for termination of employment for reasons relating to the employee is quite high, and the employer is required to thoroughly document both the circumstance on which termination is based and how the matter has been followed up prior to the decision to terminate the employment.
Termination due to redundancy, etc
A reduction in workforce due to insufficient workload or the downscaling of operations or restructuring will normally be accepted as sufficient and valid cause. In the event of such redundancy, the redundant employee(s) must be selected from a relevant pool of employees (which, as a starting point, will include all employees in the legal entity in Norway) based on recognised selection criteria (which will typically include qualifications, years of service and weighty social reasons). The employer must also investigate whether there are other vacant roles to offer the potentially redundant employee(s), and must weigh the company’s need to terminate the employment against the disadvantages such dismissal will have on the employee. Employees who are terminated due to redundancy have a preferential right to re-employment with the employer for a period of 12 months, unless the employee is not qualified for the position in question.
With effect from 1 January 2024, the requirement to offer vacant positions applies to all companies in the employer's group of companies within Norway. The preferential right to re-employment also applies to all group companies within Norway.
Procedural Requirements
In principle, the process is the same regardless of the reason for the termination. The employer must call the employee to a discussion meeting before a decision to terminate the employment is made. The purpose of the meeting is to explain the reasons for the potential termination and the employer’s assessments in this respect. The employee will be allowed to comment and supplement such information. The employee is allowed to bring a representative to the meeting. The employer must make its decision, taking all the facts of the case into consideration, after completing the relevant discussion meetings. A notice letter may then be issued (see 7.2 Notice Periods).
However, due to the fair selection of employees required in a redundancy process, a redundancy process will usually require additional procedural steps prior to the individual discussion meetings, usually including consultations with employee representatives, a town hall meeting and individual meetings with employees to map the selection criteria.
Collective Redundancies
If ten or more employees are made redundant within a 30-day period, the redundancies are considered a collective redundancy. A collective redundancy will trigger a requirement for prior consultations with the employee representatives as well as written notification to the Labour and Welfare Authority about the terminations. The aim of the consultations is to avoid a collective redundancy or, if that is not possible, to mitigate its effect on the employees.
Prior consultations with the employee representatives may be required if the employer is bound by a CBA, even if the redundancies do not qualify as a collective redundancy. Such consultations are also recommended for employers who are not bound by a CBA.
The statutory minimum notice periods will depend on the employee’s age and years of service, as follows:
It is customary in Norway for employees to agree to a notice period of three months, with six months’ notice being the market standard for executive employees. The statutory minimum notice periods will prevail over contractual notice periods if the statutory notice period is longer.
The notice period will start to run on the first day of the month after notice is given. There are no formal requirements with regard to a notice of resignation provided by the employee, although written format is recommended. For the employer, the notice of termination must be provided in writing, include certain information and be delivered personally or by registered mail.
There are no statutory rights to severance pay. Employees have a right and an obligation to work during the notice period, and employers may not elect to provide pay in lieu of notice.
External advice or authorisation of the termination of employment is not required, but employees may contest the validity of the termination (see 8.1 Wrongful Dismissal).
A summary dismissal implies that the employment is terminated with immediate effect without a notice period.
An employer may summarily dismiss an employee if said employee is guilty of a gross breach of duty or other material breach of contract. Norwegian employment contracts do not typically list the reasons for summary dismissal, as this will need to be assessed on an individual basis, taking into account the seriousness of the breach and relevant case law. The threshold is generally high and the employer carries the burden of proof. The summary dismissal must be proportionate and the employer must consider whether the purpose can be achieved by a termination with notice, which is considered a less onerous reaction.
The same procedural requirements that apply to a termination with notice also apply to a summary dismissal. The employer will therefore be required to hold an individual discussion meeting with the employee before a decision is made, and a notice letter must be delivered personally or by registered mail (see 7.2 Notice Periods).
Employees may contest the validity of a summary dismissal in the same manner as a termination with notice (see 8.1 Wrongful Dismissal), but the employee would not be entitled to remain in the position during the dispute.
The employer and the employee have contractual freedom to enter into termination agreements in connection with the termination of employment (or at any stage of the employment relationship). There are no formal requirements to consider when entering into such agreements, but the agreements should be made in writing. Certain provisions have also developed into market practice, and the terms of a termination agreement must not be unreasonable. There is no requirement for the employee to obtain independent legal advice.
Norwegian law includes several categories of employees who enjoy specific protection against termination of employment:
In these instances, the Norwegian Working Environment Act applies a presumption that a termination of employment during such absence will be based on the absence, unless the employer demonstrates other highly probable grounds for termination.
The following also applies:
An employee who alleges that a termination of employment (or summary dismissal) is invalid may request negotiations with the employer within two weeks of the termination. The employee can further instigate legal proceedings claiming reinstatement within eight weeks from the conclusion of the negotiations (or the termination, if negotiations are not held). If the employee only claims compensation, the deadline is six months from the conclusion of the negotiations (or the termination, if negotiations are not held).
Employees who are successful in their claim are entitled to reinstatement (unless this has not been claimed), compensation for suffered and future economic loss, and compensation for non-economic loss.
Employees are entitled to remain in the position until the dispute is settled. This implies a right to work and receive salary until the dispute is settled either by mutual agreement or by the courts. The salary paid during this time is non-refundable even if the employee’s claim is found to be unmerited. The right to remain in the position does not apply to employees whose employment is terminated during the trial period or who have been summarily dismissed, unless a court rules otherwise.
The Norwegian Equality and Anti-Discrimination Act and the Working Environment Act set out protected characteristics under Norwegian law. Direct or indirect discrimination on the basis of any of the following characteristics is prohibited:
However, differential treatment may be lawful if it has an objective purpose, is necessary to achieve the purpose and does not have a disproportionately negative effect on the persons subject to differential treatment, or if it is considered permitted positive treatment in line with the law.
The prohibition against discrimination applies to all aspects of employment, including announcements of positions, recruitment, reassignments and promotions, training and skills development, wage and working conditions, and termination of employment.
The employer has a duty to actively promote equality and prevent discrimination. Public companies, and private companies with more than 50 employees, must conduct regular risk assessments and implement measures to counteract discrimination, and must provide information about such efforts in the annual account (or in another publicly available document).
If an employee alleges they have been discriminated against and the circumstances give reason to believe that discrimination has occurred, the burden of proof is reversed, meaning that the employer must substantiate that discrimination has not taken place.
Employees who have been discriminated against are entitled to damages for economic and non-economic loss.
Generally, the main rule for disputes is physical attendance in both court hearings and witness examinations. During the pandemic, there was an increase in digital court proceedings, which led to changes implementing more flexibility regarding digital attendance in the Dispute Act Schedules 13-1 and 21-10. Despite the legal framework now providing higher flexibility for remote hearings, physical attendance seems to have largely reverted to pre-pandemic levels.
Most employment disputes will be tried before the ordinary courts.
Disputes concerning CBAs are to be tried before the labour court, which is a specialist court. Such proceedings may only be initiated by the employer’s association (or the employer, in the event of a direct agreement) or the trade union that is party to the CBA.
Certain employment issues will be heard by the Dispute Resolution Tribunal before they are brought before the ordinary courts. Matters concerning discrimination may be heard by the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Tribunal before being brought before the ordinary courts.
A trade union that has members in a company that has hired employees from a staffing agency may instigate legal proceedings in its own name against the employer regarding the legality of such hiring.
Class actions may be initiated if several persons have claims or obligations for which the factual or legal basis is identical or substantially similar. It is a further requirement that the claims may be heard by a court with the same composition and principally the same procedural rules. In addition, class action must be the most appropriate method of hearing the claim, and a class representative must be appointed. Class actions are not very common within employment matters in Norway.
The Dispute Act also allows for multiple claimants or defendants in a matter, upon the fulfilment of certain conditions.
The chief executive may agree to arbitration in a written advance agreement, but this is not very common. Other employees may agree to arbitration once a dispute has occurred, but this is also very uncommon in Norway.
For the ordinary courts, the main rule in Norway is that the prevailing party will be awarded attorney’s fees. The court may exempt the losing party (fully or partially) from this liability if it finds compelling grounds that justify exemption.
For the labour court, attorney’s fees are not awarded.
Norwegian Employment Law: an Introduction
Norwegian employment law has seen several developments aimed at strengthening employment protection. The main trends and developments seen this year are outlined below.
Classification of independent contractors v employees
As of 1 January 2024, the definition of “employee” in the Working Environment Act (WEA) was amended to clarify the distinction between independent contractors and employees. This change aims to ensure that individuals functioning as employees receive the appropriate protections and benefits they are entitled to according to the WEA, the Holiday Pay Act, etc.
This amendment is part of a broader effort to adapt to the evolving nature of employment and the increasing use of independent contractors across various industries.
A notable case highlighting the implications of workers’ classification involves a church singer in Northern Norway, highlighting the legal and financial risks businesses face when misclassifying workers. The outcome of this case has paved the way for many similar disputes, and it is likely that the courts will increasingly have to address similar cases in the future.
Revised definition of “employee”
The amended definition of “employee” in the WEA introduces specific criteria to determine whether a worker should be classified as an employee with employment protection rights or as an independent contractor, which are not covered by the protection of the WEA or other protective legislation.
The WEA states that an “employee” is anyone performing work for someone else to whom they are subordinate, subject to that person’s management prerogative. This hierarchical relationship implies that the employee is subject to the employer's authority and oversight.
In contrast, independent contractors are characterised by their autonomy in delivering specific results or services, managing their operational costs and assuming personal responsibility for their work. Independent contractors are not under the direct management or control of the hiring entity and operate with greater independence, often managing their own schedules, resources and methods of work.
The WEA's criteria codify existing case law and focus on the nature of the working relationship, considering whether the worker continuously makes its personal labour available, and whether the worker is subordinate through direction, management and control. This evaluation includes factors such as the degree of supervision, the level of control over the work process, and the contractual terms governing the relationship.
Criteria for classification
The preparatory works of the WEA and case law suggest several factors that indicate the existence of an employment relationship (the list is not exhaustive and other factors may also be relevant), including:
Burden of proof
One of the most significant changes introduced by the amended WEA is that it places the burden on the employer to prove that a contractor is indeed an independent contractor rather than an employee. The burden of proof is elevated as it requires the employer to prove “a high degree of probability”. If the employer fails to meet the heightened burden of proof, the individual will be classified as an employee. This places a substantial responsibility on businesses to demonstrate that their contractors meet the criteria for independent status. It makes the content and wording of contracts extremely important for businesses that intend to use independent contractors in Norway.
Case study: the church singer's verdict
A recent ruling by the Hålogaland Court of Appeal highlights the economic risk businesses face when they misclassify workers. In November 2022, the court ruled in favour of a church singer who had sued a congregation, claiming that his one-year renewable contract constituted an illegal independent contractor arrangement. The singer argued that this arrangement had deprived him of permanent employment, wages, holiday pay and pension accruals since his engagement in 2013, and demanded compensation.
The Court of Appeal concluded that the singer should be considered an employee, and therefore permanently employed by the congregation in a 63% position. Consequently, the court awarded the singer NOK100,000 in non-economic compensation, in addition to back pay for wages and holiday pay, and ordered the congregation to enrol him in its pension scheme retroactively. The congregation was also required to cover the singer's legal costs, amounting to approximately NOK950,000, and their own legal expenses, estimated at around NOK2 million.
The court examined the contractual terms and practical conduct between the parties over the years. The singer's work was governed by annual contracts, which were consistent in content over the years and outlined obligations and artistic expectations, but also highlighted the structured nature of their engagements, indicating an employment relationship.
The court noted that the singer and other musicians worked in a highly organised environment, with a set group of around 12–15 musicians consistently performing midnight concerts. Except for one musician employed as a cantor, all engagements were through annual contracts. This level of organisation and continuity supported the claim of a de facto employment relationship.
The court emphasised that, despite having some flexibility in scheduling, the singer's ability to offer his services elsewhere was limited, further indicating an employment relationship.
Implications for businesses
Businesses operating in Norway must thoroughly examine their workforce affiliations to ensure compliance with the WEA criteria. Misclassifying employees as independent contractors can have far-reaching consequences, including significant legal liabilities and financial penalties. These consequences may encompass back pay of salary and overtime, holiday pay, enrolment in pension schemes, compensation for non-compliance and legal costs.
Employers have unsuccessfully argued that previously paid fees exceeding the wage claims of misclassified employees should be offset or deducted. This argument is based on differential considerations and the notion that employees should not profit from a reclassification. The Court of Appeal has repeatedly rejected such differential considerations due to the lack of legal precedent, inadequate and/or unclear arguments, and legal grounds. This shows that the compensation also has an element of punishment in regard to the calculation of the loss.
To mitigate these risks, employers should undertake regular audits of the affiliation of the workforce – the contracts must accurately reflect the worker's classification as it is in practice. All aspects of the working relationship should align with the legal definitions of employee or independent contractor.
Requirements for the content of employment contracts
The recent amendments to the WEA (1 July 2024) introduce several new requirements for the content of employment contracts. These changes are influenced by Directive (EU) 2019/1152 on transparent and predictable working conditions in the European Union, and aim to make contracts more comprehensive and transparent. Ensuring that the rights and obligations of both employers and employees are clearly outlined is essential for fostering fair labour practice and enhancing workplace clarity.
New contract requirements
The new requirements include the following.
Implications for employers
Employers must review and update their employment contracts to comply with the WEA requirements. Please note that the amendment does not mean that the employer must give up managerial prerogative.
The new legal requirements do not mean that the employer must update existing employment contracts that were entered into before 1 July 2024. However, if the employee requests it, the employer must amend and supplement the existing employment contract in accordance with the prevailing law. In such cases, the employer has a two-month deadline to amend the contract.
It might be practical to have all employees on the same employment contract template, and therefore to consider replacing all contracts once the process is initiated. When reviewing the templates, it is recommendable to also evaluate other commercial points.
Corporate group obligations: enhanced protections during redundancies
Amendments to the obligation to offer “other suitable work” and referential rights during downsizing within a corporate group came into effect on 1 January 2024. The legislative update expands the employer’s statutory obligations beyond the individual company conducting the downsizing to encompass all entities within the group. The changes are applicable only to companies in Norway.
New legislative requirements
The expanded obligations are part of the government's efforts to strengthen employees' rights and address the unique dynamics of corporate groups, where decisions impacting employees are often made by entities other than the employers conducting the downsizing. The legislature therefore believes that these changes will enhance influence and accountability.
Offer of suitable work across the group
Employers within corporate groups are now required to offer “other suitable work” to employees facing redundancy. This means that, before terminating an employee's contract, the employer must have documentation on whether there are any other positions within the group that the employee could fill. This promotes internal mobility and helps employees retain employment within the corporate group.
Secondary preferential rights within group companies
Employees facing redundancy have preferential rights to new positions within the corporate group: if new positions become available, employees who have been made redundant have priority for these positions. This enhances job security and helps employees transition to new roles within the same corporate group.
The obligation to offer relocation may be limited to certain companies within the group if the reason for the limitation is “objectively justified”.
Employers within groups with at least 50 employees must establish a platform for collaboration, information sharing and dialogue with their employees.
Liability and compliance
If any of the subsidiaries within the group fail to fulfil the obligation to offer “other suitable work”, the company conducting the downsizing may face liability. Therefore, it is crucial for group-affiliated subsidiaries to thoroughly understand the new regulations and adapt their downsizing procedures accordingly.
Practical steps for employers
To comply with these new requirements, employers should review and update their policies to ensure alignment with the latest legal standards and organisational needs. It is also crucial to document decisions thoroughly by maintaining detailed records of the decision-making process, particularly when limiting relocation offers to certain companies within the group.
Reassignment v dismissal: the evolving duty to offer alternative employment
In the realm of employment law, the concept of “other suitable work” often arises in discussions about downsizing and layoffs. Most employers are well acquainted with the idea that, when faced with redundancy, they must offer suitable alternative roles within the organisation before proceeding with dismissals. However, the Supreme Court has recently established that the duty to consider reassignment is not limited to cases of downsizing but can also apply in situations where an employee is underperforming or facing dismissal for reasons related to their own conduct.
The case that changed the landscape
The Supreme Court's decision of 16 June 2024 significantly shifts how employers must approach employee dismissals. The case involved a healthcare worker who had been employed by a municipality since 2004. In 2017, after completing his training and obtaining a professional certificate, he secured a permanent position as a healthcare worker. Despite his qualifications, complaints about his performance emerged from both users and colleagues soon after his appointment.
In response, the municipality implemented several corrective measures. However, despite these efforts, further serious discrepancies in his performance occurred. In April 2022, he was dismissed from his position.
Legal framework: other suitable work
Under the WEA, it is generally understood that dismissals due to “downsizing or rationalisation measures” are not deemed lawful if the employer has another suitable position to offer – this is in contrast to employee misconduct.
However, in the case before the Supreme Court, the issue was whether this duty extended to dismissals related to employee performance. The Supreme Court acknowledged that, while the statutory wording implies that the duty is limited to organisational reasons for dismissal, there could still be a “limited and circumstantial” obligation to offer reassignment in cases where the dismissal is due to the employee's conduct.
The Supreme Court's criteria for reassignment
To determine the extent of this reassignment obligation, the Supreme Court identified three key criteria.
The evaluation in the case
In the specific case reviewed by the Supreme Court, the municipality's efforts to find alternative employment for the worker were deemed sufficient. The worker's performance had consistently fallen below expectations and, despite several interventions, including competency assessments and practical training, he continued to exhibit significant performance issues. The municipality had made substantial efforts to assess the worker's capabilities and explore potential roles within the health service sector.
The Supreme Court noted that the municipality had conducted a thorough investigation to identify any suitable alternative positions but found none that matched the worker's qualifications or that would have been appropriate for addressing the performance issues. The evaluations reinforced the decision to proceed with dismissal.
The rulings implications for employers
The Supreme Court's ruling extends the concept of reassignment beyond mere downsizing scenarios. The ruling derives the duty to consider relocation from the requirement to have an “objectively justified reason” before dismissal, and the employer’s obligation to balance interest when considering dismissal due to circumstances relating to the employee. The Supreme Court defined the duty to offer other suitable work as “limited and circumstantial”. This means that the employer must assess whether such a duty exists in each specific situation.
Employers must now carefully evaluate – and make documentation of the assessment – whether there are suitable alternative positions before proceeding with a dismissal, even when the reasons for termination relate to the employee's conduct.
Supreme Court ruling clarifies "whistle-blowing"
On 21 December 2023, the Supreme Court delivered a ruling that redefines the concept of whistle-blowing under the WEA. This decision has implications for employers, particularly in how they handle internal complaints and communications from employees and union representatives.
The case involved a union representative who assisted a colleague during a meeting with an HR representative, where the colleague received a written warning. The next day, the union representative sent an angry email directed to the company's Head of HR, criticising the HR representative's conduct during the meeting. The Supreme Court ruled that this email constituted a whistle-blowing notification under the WEA, as it highlighted behaviour that was a breach of the company's code of conduct regarding respectful and proper conduct.
The key takeaways of the case are as follows.
Implications for employers
This ruling has several important implications for employers.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court has clarified that whistle-blowing constitutes any form of “statement”, without specific requirements for its format or procedure. The key criterion is that the statement addresses certain issues, rather than adhering to a particular format. This broad interpretation means that any communication highlighting objectionable conditions within the workplace can be considered whistle-blowing, provided it conflicts with clearly defined norms.
The judgment emphasises that issues of concern can cover a broad spectrum, as long as they relate to a violation of legal rules, written ethical guidelines or widely accepted norms. Importantly, there is no need for the objectionable conduct to have a public interest. The critical factor is whether the employer reasonably perceives the statement to be a whistle-blowing notification.
In cases of ambiguity, it is the employer’s responsibility to determine how the statement should be interpreted. For both employers and employees, the judgment suggests focusing on addressing the facts revealed by the survey rather than debating whether a complaint qualifies as a whistle-blowing case. Typically, such complaints should be treated as whistle-blowing.
Employees are entitled to safe and satisfactory working conditions. Therefore, issues raised in whistle-blower cases must be thoroughly investigated and resolved. Instead of arguing over the classification, parties should work collaboratively to address the issues identified.
One key consideration is determining the extent of investigation required.
An essential aspect of handling whistle-blower cases is implementing measures to prevent future issues and reduce the likelihood of further whistle-blowing incidents.
Dronning Eufemias gate 11
0191 Oslo
Norway
+47 2327 2700
Post@raederbing.no www.raederbing.no