Employment Law2026-10-21

Can my employer leave me out of a bonus just because I only earn the minimum wage?

A Christmas bonus, an inflation payment or an annual bonus reserved for higher earners – and you miss out because you're on the minimum wage? In most cases that is not lawful, and the back payment can often still be recovered.

Your employer pays a bonus – a Christmas bonus, an inflation payment, an annual bonus. You, of all people, get nothing, because you “only” earn the statutory minimum wage. The colleague at the next desk earns a little more and does not miss out. That does not just feel unfair. In the vast majority of situations it is also open to legal challenge.

In short

As a rule, an employer may not exclude staff from a bonus purely because their pay sits at the level of the statutory minimum wage. The same applies where their pay has risen as a result of an increase in the minimum wage. This breaches the employment-law principle of equal treatment where the distinction has no objective connection to the purpose of the payment. The minimum wage itself is not an objective ground for such a distinction. It is owed as a matter of mandatory law. This line reflects the settled case law of the Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) on the employment-law principle of equal treatment. Anyone who earns more because of an increase in the minimum wage may not, for that reason, be excluded from a voluntary bonus. This potentially affects every member of staff working at minimum-wage level. On 1 January 2027 the minimum wage rises to 14.60 euros. It is precisely at that threshold that exclusions of this kind arise all over again.

How I can help you

Assessing whether, in your case, the exclusion from the bonus is objectively justified or breaches the principle of equal treatment
Reviewing your employment contract, works agreement or collective agreement for time-bar clauses that could jeopardise your claim
Asserting your claim to the back payment against your employer in writing and in good time
Enforcing the claim before the labour court if your employer refuses to pay

When the exclusion is unlawful – and when it is not

The employment-law principle of equal treatment applies whenever an employer grants a benefit not through individual free negotiation but according to a generalising rule applied to a group of staff. For example: “All employees with an hourly wage of more than X euros receive the bonus.” Where the employer draws such group distinctions, the boundaries must objectively fit the purpose of the payment. This is precisely where the exclusion of minimum-wage earners almost always falls down. The minimum wage is not a freely agreed level of pay but a mandatory statutory floor under section 1(1) of the Minimum Wage Act (§ 1 Abs. 1 MiLoG). Anyone who uses that floor as a criterion for excluding staff from an additional benefit is, in the end, drawing a distinction based on a circumstance. And that is exactly the circumstance the legislature chose not to leave to the employer’s free discretion.

The position is different where the bonus has its own, comprehensible purpose. That purpose has nothing to do with the level of pay itself. Examples include a pure performance bonus tied to meeting targets, a supplement for a particular qualification, or a loyalty bonus graduated by length of service. Such a loyalty bonus is calculated in the same way for all groups of staff, regardless of hourly wage. What matters in these cases is whether the chosen criterion objectively reflects the purpose of the benefit. Or does it, in effect, tie back to the level of pay after all? That is the case, for instance, with a qualifying-date or pay threshold pitched at the level of the minimum wage. A “reservation of voluntariness” in the announcement of the payment makes no difference to this. It concerns only whether the employer has to repeat the benefit the following year. It says nothing about the criteria by which the employer may distribute the payment within the group it has itself defined.

Deadlines: when you have to act

Two deadlines run in parallel. Both can cut off your claim if you wait too long:

Time-bar clauses in your contract or collective agreement. Many employment and collective agreements contain a clause requiring claims arising from the employment relationship to be asserted in writing against the employer within a set period – often three months after they fall due. Otherwise they lapse. As a rule, this clause also applies to a claim based on the principle of equal treatment. That is because what is protected against lapse and waiver under section 3 of the Minimum Wage Act (§ 3 MiLoG) is only the claim to the minimum wage itself, not the additional bonus. Anyone who relies solely on minimum-wage protection and misses the contractual notification deadline may already have lost their back-payment claim as a result.

The ordinary limitation period. Regardless of any time-bar clause, the claim becomes time-barred after three years under section 195 of the Civil Code (§ 195 BGB). Under section 199(1) of the Civil Code (§ 199 Abs. 1 BGB), the period begins at the end of the year in which the claim arose. In that year you must also have become aware of the circumstances – that is, the exclusion and its justification – or ought to have become aware of them. If, for example, the bonus was paid in December 2024 and you were excluded at that point, the limitation period will ordinarily end at the close of 31 December 2027. That is so provided no shorter time-bar clause has already taken effect before then.

How to proceed: securing the back payment

Secure the basis. Ask for the announcement or policy on the bonus (email, notice, works agreement). This will reveal the criterion on which the exclusion was based.
Review the contract. I check whether a time-bar clause applies. I also establish the latest date by which you must respond in writing.
Assert the claim in writing. The back-payment claim is notified to the employer in a way that meets the deadline and can be evidenced, with the amount quantified.
Litigate if necessary. If your employer refuses to pay, the claim is pursued before the labour court. This applies retrospectively to past payment dates as well, in so far as they have not already lapsed or become time-barred.

An example from practice

A retail worker earns 13.90 euros an hour after the most recent minimum-wage adjustment. Her employer pays a voluntary bonus of several hundred euros at the end of the year. Only employees who, on a particular qualifying date, earned more than 14 euros an hour are entitled to it. The reasoning: anyone who has already benefited from the statutory increase in the minimum wage does not also need the bonus. The employee misses out, even though her role and hours are exactly the same as those of the colleagues above the threshold. Here the pay threshold sits so close to the statutory minimum wage that the bonus is effectively repurposed to offset the increase in the minimum wage. That is precisely the purpose the law does not permit the employer to pursue.

Common mistakes

Complaining verbally rather than in writing. A complaint raised “in passing” with your line manager does not meet a time-bar deadline. Only asserting the claim in writing, in a way that can be evidenced, does.
Waiting too long because you are thinking of minimum-wage protection. Section 3 of the Minimum Wage Act (§ 3 MiLoG) protects only the minimum-wage claim itself against forfeiture, not the bonus. Those who confuse the two let time-bar deadlines slip by.
Treating the reservation of voluntariness as a blank cheque. Voluntariness allows an employer to drop the benefit entirely in future, but not to distribute it arbitrarily within a given year.
Pointing only to colleagues without knowing the criteria. Without knowing the exact basis of the distinction, the breach of the principle of equal treatment cannot be made out cleanly.

Frequently asked questions

Does this protection also apply where the bonus was expressly announced as voluntary and without any legal entitlement?

Yes. Voluntariness concerns only whether the employer has to repeat the payment the following year. Once the employer decides to pay the benefit, it must be distributed equally and according to objective criteria within the group the employer has defined.

May an employer distinguish between full-time and part-time staff?

A pro-rata reduction based on working hours is generally permissible. A complete exclusion of part-time staff, by contrast, is in principle not permissible, as it breaches the prohibition on disadvantaging part-time employees. In legal terms this is a separate point to be examined alongside the principle of equal treatment.

Do I have to sue for the back payment, or will the employer pay of its own accord once asked?

Many employers do pay once they receive a well-founded written request, in order to avoid litigation. If the employer does not respond or refuses, a claim before the labour court remains the next step.

What if my employment contract contains a three-month time-bar clause?

Then, as a rule, you must assert your claim in writing against the employer within those three months of the bonus falling due. Otherwise it lapses, regardless of the three-year limitation period. The shorter the deadline, the more important it is to act quickly once you learn of the exclusion.

Does this also apply to mini-jobbers or apprentices?

The employment-law principle of equal treatment applies regardless of the extent or status of employment, as long as the employer distributes the bonus according to a group-based criterion. Whether genuinely comparable groups actually exist in a given case depends on the specific circumstances of the work involved.

Your next step

Have you been excluded from a bonus because you earn at minimum-wage level? If so, one thing matters above all: the deadline for asserting the claim in writing must not pass before the claim has been assessed and pursued. I will look at your contract, the announcement of the payment and the deadline position, and tell you what can still be achieved – more on this and other questions from employment law.

This article provides general information and is no substitute for legal advice in an individual case. Last updated: 2026-10-21.

Christian Czirnich, Rechtsanwalt (attorney at law), Kirchseeon near Munich

Tell me why you were excluded from the bonus payment – I will look into it.

I read every message myself and usually reply on the next working day. What you write to me is covered by legal professional privilege from the first word, even if no engagement comes about. The initial assessment is free of charge.