– Nå ligger ballen hos regjeringen

The ball is now in the government's court regarding whether part-time employees should be paid overtime from the first hour worked. The report from Labour Minister Kjersti Stenseng, received last week after parties discussed the issue for over a year and a half, contained no common proposals for a solution. Group leader Anette Hemmingby, a lawyer and senior consultant at BI Business School, reported that the discussions have been difficult from the start due to the significant consequences involved.

Hemmingby said that it became clear early on that they wouldn't be able to deliver on Stenseng's assignment. She expressed hope and belief that they would reach an agreement, but now the decision lies with the government. The disagreement centers around what two EU courts mean for the Norwegian labor market. The EU concluded that the current practice of part-time employees receiving overtime only after reaching full-time status constitutes differential treatment.

Norway implemented the EU's part-time directive in Norwegian law in 2005 when the Labor Environment Act was adopted. In 2023 and 2024, the EU court ruled twice on the interpretation of the part-time directive, emphasizing the unlawful differential treatment of part-time employees who don't receive overtime pay for hours worked beyond their agreed-upon allocation.

These EU rulings have been appealed to the Supreme Court and are therefore not legally binding. The government set up a working group in April 2025 to examine how Norway's compensation rules for overtime work could be changed. The group was briefed on Tuesday, September 15. The next step is to gather expertise and later submit proposals for legislative changes through hearings.

LO believes that businesses should already have adapted, while NHO argues that there is still room for action in the EEA regulation to continue as is now. If the practice needs to change, other regulations should also be considered. Hemmingby clearly stated that she believes the rules need to be changed and cannot continue as before.

She identified herself neither with the employer's nor the employee's side, but made her assessment as an expert. She also believes this should be seen as a whole, and it might be closer to the employer's side. However, the ongoing discussions were not initiated because parties were not initially in agreement on the premise. The next step for Stenseng will be to seek help from external experts who will propose "holistic solutions to prevent differential treatment of part-time employees in terms of overtime compensation," while preserving a full-time culture.

They will also evaluate whether other provisions should be changed, such as part-time employees' prior rights to extra duties. The case will then be sent for hearings, and in the meantime, two Norwegian cases where the employee won at the first instance are pending. Hemmingby still holds out hope that "the unique three-party Norwegian cooperation" can play a role in this issue.

She is unsure whether the employer's side is satisfied with waiting for responses from the judiciary, but regardless, the Supreme Court decision is unlikely to provide answers to all the questions, as they are so complex and potentially have large consequences.