> Quervergleiche sind nicht zulässig For anyone not speaking German: this means performance reviews can't be based on the performance of other employees in tha

> Quervergleiche sind nicht zulässig For anyone not speaking German: this means performance reviews can't be based on the performance of other employees in that company. This also cuts both ways: when challenging a performance review you can't argue that your performance was average compared to other employees, you'd have to compare it to the industry average. > "Leistungszulage" cannot be cut The union contract guarantees "equal wages for equal work" and defines wages and a range of bonuses (the "Leistungszulage"). The idea is that two people working for different companies doing the same kind of work get the same wage if they're both average performers (compared to the industry as a whole). Additionally it formally defines the criteria by which performance is evaluated and how the resulting scores correspond to increases/decreases in the "Leistungszulage". The "Leistungszulage" according to that document is set at 14% for average performers. Higher performers get more, low performers get less. This means in practice that +14% is the baseline for a variable part of the regular wage that can be higher or lower depending on the performance. So unless lnsru's complaint is that 114% of whatever the nominal wage is is "highly overpaid", the argument is entirely moot. To an average worker, that 14% for average performance is not an extra, it's their expected baseline. So anything on top is a reward any anything less a punishment, just as with any other bonus not negotiated by a union. If anything, this makes it easier for the company to cut low performers' pay (as long as they can prove the low performance if challenged) compared to non-union contracts with no pre-defined variable bonus where the only option would be changing the contract (which is non-trivial, especially when the employee has no reason to make it easy).