Employment Law2026-10-04

I'm severely disabled and I've been dismissed – is the dismissal automatically void without the Integration Office?

Without the Integration Office's consent, your employer may not dismiss you as a severely disabled employee. What that means for your dismissal – and why you still have to act straight away.

You’ve received notice of dismissal and you are severely disabled or treated as equivalent to a severely disabled person. As far as you know, your employer never asked the Integration Office (Integrationsamt) for consent. So the crucial question now is this: does that take the dismissal off the table, or do you still have to do something?

In short

Yes, a dismissal like this is void. But “automatically” is not the right word – you still have to act. Under § 168 SGB IX, your employer needs the Integration Office’s prior consent. Without that consent, your employer is not allowed to dismiss you. If it is missing all the same, the dismissal breaches a statutory prohibition. It is then void under § 134 BGB. Even so, you have to assert that invalidity before the court within the time limit: within three weeks of the dismissal reaching you. Otherwise the dismissal is deemed valid retrospectively under § 7 KSchG – even though it never was.

How I can help you

I check whether, and when, your employer actually applied for the Integration Office’s consent
I keep an eye on your deadline: the three-week period for an unfair dismissal claim runs regardless of the invalidity
I obtain the procedural file from the Integration Office if an application was made
I check whether the Representative Body for Severely Disabled Employees (Schwerbehindertenvertretung) was properly consulted
I prepare the unfair dismissal claim and file it with the Labour Court

Who is covered by the special protection against dismissal

The protection under § 168 SGB IX does not apply to everyone with a disability. Two conditions must be met:

Severe disability or equivalent status. You are severely disabled under § 2 Abs. 2 SGB IX if your degree of disability (GdB) is at least 50. If your GdB is between 30 and under 50, the protection still applies – provided the Federal Employment Agency has granted your application to be treated as equivalent to a severely disabled person (§ 2 Abs. 3 SGB IX). Without that equivalent status, there is no special protection against dismissal at a GdB below 50, even where the disability is obvious. If the severe disability was only established after the dismissal, timing matters: was the assessment procedure already under way before the dismissal? That is a separate point to examine. I look at it specifically in your case.

At least six months’ service. Under § 173 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 SGB IX, the special protection against dismissal does not apply if the employment relationship had not yet existed for six months without interruption at the point the dismissal reached you. This qualifying period runs in parallel with the general qualifying period under the Protection Against Dismissal Act. In legal terms, however, I examine it in its own right. What counts is how long the employment relationship actually lasted – not whether the employer knew about the disability.

Alongside this, there are further, rarer exceptions – for example in dismissals connected with a severance entitlement from the age of 58. But that only concerns particular social plan scenarios. In the ordinary case of a “normal” dismissal without the Integration Office, it does not come into play.

If your employer did not apply to the Integration Office for consent, the dismissal breaches § 168 SGB IX. The same is true if your employer did apply for consent but dismissed you before the decision was given. A legal act that breaches a statutory prohibition is void under § 134 BGB – unless the statute provides otherwise. § 168 SGB IX contains no such departing provision. The dismissal is therefore invalid from the outset. In law, the employment relationship continues as though the dismissal had never happened.

This holds regardless of whether your employer had grounds for dismissal. Even a dismissal that would otherwise stand on operational or conduct-related grounds fails on the missing consent, where that consent was mandatory.

The decisive catch: invalidity does not take effect “visibly” on its own. If you want to assert that the dismissal is invalid – on whatever ground, and so also on the ground of invalidity under § 134 BGB – you have to act. Under § 4 Satz 1 KSchG, you must bring a claim before the Labour Court within three weeks of the dismissal reaching you. If you miss that deadline, the dismissal is deemed valid from the outset, retrospectively, under § 7 KSchG. The missing consent of the Integration Office then no longer protects you. This mechanism takes most people by surprise, because it runs against common sense: a “void” dismissal becomes valid simply through the passage of time.

The process: what should have happened at the Integration Office

To judge whether the fault really lies with the employer, the correct process matters:

A written or electronic application by the employer to the competent Integration Office, § 170 Abs. 1 SGB IX – the competent office is the one at the location of the business.
Consultation of the works council or staff council, the Representative Body for Severely Disabled Employees and the affected employee by the Integration Office, § 170 Abs. 2 SGB IX.
A decision within one month of the application being received in the case of an ordinary dismissal, § 171 Abs. 1 SGB IX. For an extraordinary (summary) dismissal, a shorter period applies: the application must be made within two weeks. The Integration Office must then decide within two weeks of the application being received. If it does not decide, consent is deemed to have been granted under § 174 SGB IX.
Only once consent has been granted may the employer give notice of dismissal.

In addition, the employer must inform and consult the in-house Representative Body for Severely Disabled Employees under § 178 Abs. 2 SGB IX – without delay, fully, and independently of the Integration Office procedure. This applies before any decision affecting a severely disabled employee. If that consultation is missing, it can be a separate, additional ground of invalidity. In practice, I therefore always examine both strands: the Integration Office procedure and the involvement of the Representative Body for Severely Disabled Employees within the business.

An example scenario

An employee with a GdB of 60 has worked at the same business for four years. She receives an ordinary dismissal; the employer gives a shortage of work as the reason. On enquiry with the Representative Body for Severely Disabled Employees it emerges that there was never any application to the Integration Office, and the Representative Body was not consulted either. The dismissal is void under § 134 BGB in conjunction with § 168 SGB IX. Even so, the employee must bring a claim within three weeks of the dismissal reaching her. If she only reacts after five weeks, because she thought “void is void, I don’t need to go to court about it” – then the dismissal is deemed valid. The employment relationship is at an end.

Common mistakes

Waiting, because the dismissal is “invalid anyway”. It is precisely this misconception that lets the three-week deadline slip by unused. The dismissal then becomes valid under § 7 KSchG.
Not checking whether there is any GdB decision or equivalent-status decision at all. Without an established GdB of at least 50, or valid equivalent status from a GdB of 30, the special protection against dismissal does not apply – and then a missing Integration Office procedure does not help you either.
Overlooking the six-month period. Anyone who has only been with the business for four months is not covered by § 168 SGB IX, even with a high GdB.
Relying on the missing consent alone and not having the other grounds for dismissal examined. Sometimes it is worth challenging the social justification of the dismissal in parallel, in case the Integration Office does give its consent after the event or a consent procedure was already running.
Leaving communication with the Integration Office to the employer alone. You have a right to be heard in the procedure yourself under § 170 Abs. 2 SGB IX, and you should use it actively – or have it used on your behalf by a lawyer.

Frequently asked questions

Do I have to do anything if the dismissal is void in any case?

Yes, absolutely. The invalidity only protects you if you assert it before the court within the time limit. If there is no unfair dismissal claim within three weeks of the dismissal reaching you, the dismissal is deemed valid retrospectively under § 7 KSchG – even if it was originally void.

Then the employer gave notice too early – no dismissal is permitted before consent has been granted. That too makes the dismissal void under § 134 BGB, regardless of how the Integration Office procedure later turns out.

Does the special protection against dismissal also apply during the probationary period?

No. Under § 173 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 SGB IX, the special protection against dismissal does not apply as long as the employment relationship has not yet existed for six months without interruption. During the first six months there is no additional protection from the Integration Office in this respect.

How do I know whether my employer made an application?

If an application is running, the Integration Office hears from you, as the affected person, during the procedure. If you have heard nothing about it, that strongly suggests no application was made. Certainty comes from an enquiry to the competent Integration Office or from inspecting the file – which I arrange for you.

What if I only applied for equivalent status after the dismissal?

What counts, in principle, is when the dismissal reached you. If an equivalent-status procedure was already pending at that point but not yet decided, it turns on the particular case. Whether that triggers the protection is something I look at closely on the basis of your application documents.

Your next step

If you’ve received a dismissal, every day counts. The three-week period for an unfair dismissal claim runs regardless of how obvious the invalidity may seem. Let me examine the dismissal, the Integration Office procedure and the involvement of the Representative Body for Severely Disabled Employees. I file the claim within the deadline. You’ll find more on the next steps and on calculating the deadline in the Employment Law section.

This article provides general information and is no substitute for legal advice in an individual case. Last updated: 2026-10-04.

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

Tell me about your case – 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.