The former employee claimed that the company made a mistake in calculation of an average monthly salary (AMS) due to allegedly wrong interpretation of rules, how various elements of remuneration should be reflected in AMS. The core of the dispute was about the rules of inclusion into AMS of a variable pay component. As per legislation in force, variable part of remuneration may not be paid in cash immediately, since: a) certain portion of this wage should be allotted to the provisioning period and b) should be granted in the form of the right to the employer‘s shares, share-related financial instruments or other non-monetary tools.
The courts of first and appeal instances stated absence of any infringements from the employer’s side. The cassation complaint of the former employee was rejected.
This is a unique case, since the courts formed a rule on application of specific legislation issued by the Bank of Lithuania and EBA’s Guidelines, which is valid in financial sector, comparing to the general rules provided for in the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania,
Interests of the financial institution were represented by Partner Dr Ieva Povilaitiene and Associate Viktorija Minkevičiūtė.