Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Rovaniemen HAO 14.07.2009 09/0324/1 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed claim to keep caregiver contract salary at higher rate without mutual agreement.

Case Number Rovaniemen HAO 14.07.2009 09/0324/1
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court dismissed the caregiver's request to maintain the contractually agreed higher salary rate. The court found that the caregiver contract was validly concluded for a specific salary tier and could only be modified by mutual consent of both parties. Consequently, the employer remained obligated to pay the original higher rate until a new agreement was reached or the contract terminated.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki omaishoidon tuesta 8 §; A contract for personal care cannot be unilaterally modified by the employer regarding salary tiers; the original agreement remains binding until changed by mutual consent.

Keywords

AI generated
caregiver contract salary tier modification mutual consent requirement administrative court unilateral termination

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki omaishoidon tuesta 8 §
Laki omaishoidon tuesta 8 §
AI generated
kko-precedent_1998_107
Supreme Court dismisses claim that employer's unilateral right to change commission tables violates unfairness rules.
labour_1972_68
Labour court dismisses claim that a union salary increase must be offset by a service bonus under collective agreement.
labour_1973_90
Labor court dismisses claim where collective agreement requires maintaining prior 25% bonus practice during waiting time.
labour_2010_21
Labor court dismisses union claim that municipal merger changes retroactively alter collective agreement wage classifications.
labour_2011_145
Court allows union claim that personal salary reduction requires documented performance decline and agreed improvement measures.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Omaishoitaja A ja kaupunki B olivat 28.2.2007 tehneet C:n omaishoitoa koskevan toistaiseksi voimassa olevan sopimuksen, jonka mukaan hoitopalkkio määräytyi maksuluokan II mukaisesti. Viranhaltija oli 6.2.2008 alentanut hoitopalkkion määrän maksuluokan I mukaan määräytyväksi.

A vaati omaishoitosopimuksen toisena osapuolena hallinto-oikeudessa, että hoitopalkkio maksetaan sopimuksen mukaisena maksuluokkaan II perustuen.

Hallinto-oikeus, joka tutki asian hallintoriitana, totesi, että omaishoitosopimusta voidaan hoitopalkkion määrän osalta muuttaa ainoastaan kummankin sopimusosapuolen suostumuksella. A:lle oli siten edelleen maksettava hoitopalkkiota maksuluokkaan II perustuen siihen asti, kunnes asiasta mahdollisesti toisin sovitaan tai omaishoitosopimus päättyy.

Laki omaishoidon tuesta 8 §

Lainvoimainen