Labour Court: unit-price bonus hours cannot divide average hourly pay

The Labour Court (työtuomioistuin) has held in TT 2026:33 that an employer bound by the building-services sector collective agreement for LVI employees cannot compute keskituntiansio (average hourly earnings) from the hours credited under a company-level unit-price bonus model instead of the hours actually workedFinlex. The claims by Rakennusliitto ry against an LVI contractor succeed on that rule.Finlex

Under section 12, keskituntiansio is the annual-holiday average hourly earnings under the attached holiday-pay agreement (lomapalkkasopimus) for the preceding holiday credit year (lomanmääräytymisvuosi)Finlex, increased by the percentage agreed between the unions: pay earned or fallen due for time at work, excluding the premium on top of basic pay for emergency work and statutory or contractual overtime, divided by the corresponding hours workedFinlex. The employer instead used the hours generated by its production-bonus agreementFinlex, under which piece-like unit prices credited fixed hours per fitting task even when the employee finished fasterFinlex. The inflated divisor depressed the average: the employer's figures ran at roughly 20-24 euroFinlex while the recalculation reached 34.23 euro from 1 April 2019 and peaked at 59.60 euro from 1 April 2022. Consent could not save the modelFinlex, because the signatory unions agreed section 12 leaves no room for local derogation to the employee's detrimentFinlex.

The error propagated across every pay component keyed to keskituntiansio: public-holiday compensation (arkipyhäkorvaus), sick pay, on-call emergency work (hälytysluontoinen työ), Sunday work compensation and overtime premiums, plus a 5.5 per cent working-time reduction payment (työajan lyhennysraha) on the unpaid amounts. The court also awarded unpaid annual-holiday pay, holiday compensation and holiday bonuses (lomaraha) for the credit years starting 1 April 2019 through the end of employment on 8 August 2023, and found performance and production bonuses left out of holiday pay contrary to section 19 of the agreement and section 11 of the Vuosilomalaki (162/2005). In total the operative part orders some 38,642 euro in arrears with default interest under section 4(1) of the Korkolaki from the stated due dates.

On limitation the court applied chapter 13, section 9 of the Työsopimuslaki (55/2001)Finlex: a pay claim becomes time-barred five years after falling due unless interruptedFinlex, and lapses if no action is brought within two years of the end of employmentFinlex. The action became pending on 7 August 2025, within two years of the employment ending on 8 August 2023, so no lapse occurredFinlex; but with no interruption shown before service of the writ on 13 August 2025FinlexFinlex, claims falling due before 13 August 2020 were time-barred and the union's subsidiary claims from that date were awarded insteadFinlex.

On evidence the employer had breached its duty under section 32 of the Työaikalaki (872/2019) to record hours worked and compensation paid, so it bore the adverse consequences in unclear situations. The union counted eight hours for each day with a work entry even though days were often shorter, which favoured the employer since shorter days would raise the average. Valttikortti site-access records were the main contractor's tax-control records rather than employer working-time records, so the omission of at least one individual working day did not make the calculations unreliable. The court also imposed a compensatory fine (hyvityssakko)Finlex for a knowing breach: the provisions had been known to the employer since 2022, both unions repeatedly said the model breached the agreement, yet the practice continued. The losing employer pays the union's legal costs in full.

Legal basis: talotekniikka-alan LVI-toimialan työntekijöiden työehtosopimus 12 §, 19 § and lomapalkkasopimus 2 §; Työsopimuslaki (55/2001) 13 luvun 9 §; Työaikalaki (872/2019) 32 §; Vuosilomalaki (162/2005) 11 §; Työehtosopimuslaki (436/1946) 7 § and 10 §.