Die Abmahnung. German employment law generally requires a formal written warning before a conduct-based dismissal, stating the behaviour, why it is unacceptable, and what happens if it recurs. The employer cannot escalate directly. The law inserts a step and requires it to be documented.
The ombudsman
German banks, insurers, energy suppliers and public bodies maintain ombudsman schemes: free, binding on the company up to a threshold, and available before any court is approached. A complaint has somewhere to go that is not a lawsuit.
The conciliation board
Die Einigungsstelle. Where a German employer and works council cannot agree on a matter subject to co-determination, either may call a conciliation board — an equal panel with a neutral chair whose decision binds. The deadlock has a named institution attached to it, and using it is normal rather than hostile.
Arbitration before the strike
Schlichtung. German collective bargaining runs through an agreed sequence: negotiation rounds, a declared failure, then arbitration by a neutral chair before any strike. The escalation path exists so that escalating requires passing through something first.
The conciliation hearing
Before a German employment dispute reaches a full hearing, the labour court holds a conciliation hearing — the Güteverfahren — presided over by the judge alone, whose function is to bring the parties to a settlement. Roughly half of all German labour disputes end there. The system builds a stage before the dispute becomes a dispute.
Willing to argue
The dictionary defines streitbar as follows: [constantly] prepared, having the will to, argue, with someone over something, to critically and activelydispute something; to fight for or about something, to take a stand for something or someone, a fighter; [older] prepared for battle; warrior-like, brave.
The adjective streitbar has a very positive connotation in the German language. In recalling famous persons one often reads the sentence Er war streitbar – he was streitbar.
Politicians are ever more frequently characterized as being streitbar. Streitbar does not mean that one seeks out conflicts in a negative sense. Rather, it means to stand up for ones beliefs, and not avoid serious confrontations.
Erbfeindschaft
The Germans have very low tolerance for conflict resolutions which declare clear winners and losers. Do Germans do their best to avoid open confrontation because the one or the other side wants to avoid being the loser, or because their sense of humility forbids them from being the declared winner?
A look into recent history might help us to understand why Germans avoid zero-sum mentality, preferring instead win-win situations.
The so-called German-French Erbfeindschaft – loosely translated as traditional or hereditary enmity or hostility – was a term used to define the wars between the two peoples going back to King Louis the XIV up until and including the Second World War.
The Germans won the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71. The annexation of Elsass-Lothringen by Germany led to French desire for revenge.
The French are then on the winning side of the First World War. The Treaty of Versailles punishes Germany very harshly, making a lasting peace almost impossible. The Germans see it as political and military humiliation, which the National Socialists use to their advantage in the 1930s.
Then the Second World War. The Germans defeat and occupy France. But the Germans lose that war. But this time both sides have learned their lesson. They decide to integrate economically in order to end once and for all the so-called Erbfeindschaft. They choose cooperation over confrontation.
The Germans believe that a conflict is not resolved when one side loses and the other wins. A conflict is resolved when both sides accept the resolution.
“No!” to top-down
Although Germans are known to follow written laws and directives, they reject almost instinctively any and all top-down decisions, directives or commands where management has not involved them in their formulation.
Especially when it involves the details of their daily work, Germans are very sensitive to outside influences which limit their freedom of decision making and action. Germans at all levels reject top-down decisions, based on hierarchical authority and not on persuasive arguments.
“Good things need their time”
The German expression Gut Ding will Weile haben – good things need their time – states that things which are supposed to turn out good will need some time. This becomes clear especially when important decisions are to be addressed:
“Quality before speed: Merkel pulls the brakes at the introduction of new supervision of European banks.” (Handelsblatt 17.2.2015)
“The German Handball Federation President Bauer: “Quality comes before speed.“ (Lahner Zeitung 20.6.2014)
“NPD-Ban: Quality before speed.” (Hamburger Abendblatt 9.12.2011)
Ultima ratio
German workers do not like to strike. It is considered the ultima ratio – weapon of last resort – used only when negotiations about wages and worker‘s rights have completely broken down.
In 2002, when the German government passed painful but necessary social and employment reforms, there were strikes in 938 companies. In 2000 there was not a single strike. 2001 saw only 48 strikes. A decade later, in 2011, there were 158. On average only three days a year are lost due to strikes in Germany.
Ultima ratio. Latin ultimus, the last, final, the furthest away. ratio: reason, reasonable thoughts; the last possible solution, the final remaining path out of a conflict.
Friedenspflicht. Literally peace obligation or obligation to keep the peace. When German employers and employees enter into wage negotiations they are obligated for the first ten days to refrain from strikes or lockouts.
The Friedenspflicht is anchored in §74 of the Betriebsverfassungsgesetzes, the law governing the relations between employers and employees:
The employer and the works council (a kind of white collar union) should meet at a minimum once per month in order to discuss potential conflicts and to propose in good faith recommendations on how to resolve them. The employer and the works council are obligated to refrain from methods of pressure – strikes, lockouts, etc. – which could disrupt company operations.
In 1923, during the politically unstable Weimar Republic, the Stresemann government passed laws requiring a mediator to resolve conflicts between employers and labor. Should companies and labor unions not come to agreement on wages and other benefits, the government had the power – and the obligation – to engage an arbitrator, whose decisions were legally binding.
German schools train both students and teachers to anticipate and prevent potential conflicts, as well as to mediate those which have been escalated.
The Prussian military instituted a rule informally called the Prussian Night, which obligated conflict parties to not escalate their problems within the first 24 hours of the conflict. Those in conflict should first „sleep over it“, then decide how to proceed.