The legal fight to secure minimum-wage pay for Germany’s disabled workers has moved into the courtroom, with a test case that could affect hundreds of thousands who currently work in sheltered workshops. The suit is brought on behalf of 57-year-old Jürgen Linnemann, who has spent his working life in a “Werkstatt für behinderte Menschen” – a German sheltered workshop. In English, these are often described as sheltered workshops, and in Germany they employ about 300,000 disabled people.
The workshops produce a range of goods for international brands, but workers are paid less than the minimum wage paid to comparable roles in mainstream employment. Crucially, workers in sheltered workshops are not legally classified as employees, which means they typically do not receive minimum wage protections or the right to join a trade union. Linnemann is asking the court to decide that people like him should be treated as employees and be paid at least the minimum wage.
The BBC’s Amy Zayed reports that the case has wider effects for Germany’s disability policy and labor market integration. Hubert Hüppe, a former federal commissioner for the interests of disabled people and a critic of the workshop system, argues that once a person becomes part of what he describes as a segregated system, it becomes very hard to move out of it. He notes how a person can pass from a special kindergarten to a special school and then into one of these workshops, illustrating the life path many face.
Dirk Hähnel, now in his 50s, is cited as an example of someone who spent much of adult life in sheltered workshops near Paderborn. He was initially placed in a regular school but was later transferred to a special school against his wishes, and when preparing to leave that institution, was told the only option was to go to a workshop. He recalls a particularly painful job interview in which he disclosed epilepsy and was told, “we don’t employ idiots here.”
The author also reflects on personal experiences, including being born blind and remembering a school report at age six that recommended a school for children with learning disabilities. The piece emphasizes the journalist’s own background as context for the broader discussion about visibility and inclusion in the labor market.
Hüppe argues that the workshops fail in a fundamental duty to rehabilitate disabled people and prepare them for mainstream work. He points to economic incentives in Germany’s system: companies with more than 20 employees are required by law to employ at least one disabled person, with larger firms facing a higher quota of 5%. When companies miss these targets, they must pay compensation into a central fund to support disabled workers. Some firms choose to pay the fund instead of meeting the quota, while others are offered an extra incentive to outsource production to a workshop because the compensation is reduced.
As a result, fewer than 1% of disabled workshop workers make a successful transition to mainstream employment. Hüppe notes that workshops may resist losing their best staff because they operate as commercial entities reliant on their own output, and maintaining staff is often in their interest. He highlights a 2023 report by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities that criticized Germany’s disability record, calling attention to a high share of disabled people in sheltered workshops and a low rate of transition to open labor markets.
Not everyone in the workshop system is unhappy with it. Medina Arnaut, 35, works for a Caritas-led workshop in Paderborn and chairs the local workshop council, which represents worker interests much like a trade union. She notes that some colleagues value the workshop environment for their needs and that experiences in the mainstream economy can be exhausting or harmful for certain individuals. Karla Bredenbals, who runs Caritas workshops in Paderborn, agrees that the transition rate is too low but acknowledges that, in some cases, there are barriers to moving on—such as inaccessible facilities or lack of accessible public transport—while also acknowledging that some workers resist losing productive colleagues who stay behind.
Bredenbals adds that discussions about rights must also consider obligations. She says workers in workshops are expected to perform tasks and meet contractual standards, even as she recognizes that not everyone can meet those obligations fully. Linnemann’s case targets a different set of Caritas-run workshops near Münster from those run by Bredenbals’ operation, and is being brought by the Berlin-based civil rights group Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (The Society for Civil Rights). The next hearing at Münster Labour Court is scheduled for September, with a final decision not expected for about a year. Additional reporting by Tim Mansel adds depth to the account, signaling a broader legal and political debate shaping Germany’s approach to disability rights and the economics of the workshop system.
