Equal pay lawsuit against Daimler: We are fighting for equal pay
Together with a head of department at Daimler, we are suing for equal pay. In October 2025, the Federal Labor Court ruled in our favor: our plaintiff is allowed to compare her salary to that of a specific colleague. If Daimler cannot objectively justify this salary difference, the company must compensate her in full.
Our plaintiff has been employed by Daimler for almost thirty years. More than 15 years ago, she was promoted to department head at the E3 level. This is the third hierarchical level of senior management at Daimler. Since returning from parental leave on a part-time basis, the plaintiff has been earning significantly less than her male colleagues at the same level: her median monthly salary was around 18 percent lower between 2018 and 2022.
When other salary components are included, the average salary difference was even higher, at over 23 percent, with peak values of up to 39 percent. For example, the allocation of virtual shares to male E3 managers was up to 140 percent higher than that of the plaintiff. The plaintiff also earns about 30 percent less than her direct colleague from the same division – even though both have been with the company for the same length of time, were promoted in the same year, and have the same qualifications
FIRST AND SECOND INSTANCE BEFORE THE LABOR COURT: SYSTEMATIC WAGE DISCRIMINATION
In the first instance, on November 22, 2023, the Stuttgart Labor Court initially ordered Daimler to pay the plaintiff the difference between her salary and the median salary of the male comparison group. This amounted to a five-figure sum for a period of five years. However, the labor court did not award the plaintiff the difference between her salary and that of her direct colleague, meaning that the decision was not compatible with the principle of equal pay.
On October 1, 2024, the Baden-Württemberg Regional Labor Court heard our equal pay lawsuit in the second instance. The court handed down its ruling on the same day: the judges acknowledged that women at Daimler are systematically paid less than men. However, when calculating the wage difference owed, the court deviated from previous equal pay standards: The court limited the claim to the difference between the female and male median. This means that women could never compare themselves with male colleagues in the upper half of the salary scale – even if there are no reasons for the salary difference. This unusual approach taken by the Regional Labor Court is not compatible with the right to equal pay under European law or the Pay Transparency Act.
Daimler failed to adequately justify the salary differences in both instances. The company does not have a transparent and objective remuneration system for E3 managers. Instead, supervisors are free to decide how the available budget is distributed among department heads. As a result, the salaries of the more than 200 E3 department heads at Daimler vary widely.
EQUAL PAY SUCCESS BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR COURT
On October 23, 2025, the Federal Labor Court finally upheld our claim on the important questions of principle (BAG - 8 AZR 300/24): The court ruled that the department head can compare herself to her direct colleague who does equivalent work. If the employer cannot justify the wage difference on the basis of objective criteria, they must compensate for it in full.
In doing so, a woman can also compare herself to men at the top of the salary scale and demand a corresponding salary adjustment. The Federal Labor Court clearly rejected the opinion of the lower courts: The right to equal pay is not limited to the difference from the median. Together with the plaintiff, we have thus achieved an important clarification for the enforcement of equal pay.
The Federal Labor Court referred the case back to the Baden-Württemberg Regional Labor Court for a decision on the merits. Daimler thus has another opportunity to submit objective reasons for the plaintiff's lower pay.
GFF is experienced in the fight against pay discrimination
The case against Daimler AG is the third equal pay lawsuit supported by the GFF. In the case of ZDF journalist Birte Meier, the Federal Labor Court clarified that permanent freelancers are entitled to information in accordance with the Remuneration Transparency Act.
Our plaintiff Susanne Dumas, who earned significantly less than her direct colleague at a metalworking company in Saxony, was proven right by the Federal Labor Court: employers are not allowed to deviate from the principle of “equal pay for equal work” just because a man demands a higher salary than his female colleague.
