Interim Reference for a Planned Career Change
- 4 days ago
- 3 min read
There is no express statutory basis for a reference issued while the employment relationship is still running. Following a decision of the Landesarbeitsgericht Köln (Regional Labour Court of Cologne) of March 2026, it is nevertheless sufficient for employees to give a coherent account of a planned career change (judgment of 04.03.2026, case no. 5 SLa 495/25). A plain denial no longer allows the employer to dismiss the request.
1. The Case: Two E-Mails
The claimant returned to work after several months of illness. Shortly afterwards he asked his employer in writing for a qualified Zwischenzeugnis (interim reference) and initially gave no reason for doing so. His employer refused.
In a second letter he set out his motive: he intended to change direction professionally and to apply outside the company as well. That did not get him anywhere either. The employer first denied the stated motive without any further explanation and later took the position that no compelling reason (triftiger Grund) existed.
The claimant won at first instance. The Regional Labour Court of Cologne upheld that judgment on appeal.
2. The Decision: A Graduated Burden of Proof
German law does not provide for an interim reference. Section 109 GewO (Gewerbeordnung = German Trade Regulation Act) covers only the reference issued at the end of the employment relationship. The courts have been filling that gap for decades by drawing on the contractual duty of consideration under section 242 BGB (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch = German Civil Code) and requiring an objectively justified interest. Recognised grounds include a transfer of undertaking, a change in management, a transfer to another role, a substantially altered set of duties, longer absences and pending unfair dismissal proceedings.
The Regional Labour Court sets out in stages how that interest must be pleaded. At the first stage it is enough for the person concerned to explain plausibly what the reference is needed for. The compelling reason is then established for the time being.
A blanket denial does not take the employer any further at this point. Merely stating that one considers the declared intention doubtful imposes no obligation on the employee. Only once the employer identifies tangible circumstances that speak against the stated reason does the employee have to go further. Otherwise the threshold would be unreasonably high, because a career change that is still only planned can hardly be evidenced before it has taken place.
3. The Limits of the Claim
The court also makes clear what does not follow from the decision. It creates no permanent entitlement to ever new interim references without any change in circumstances. Repeated requests without a recognisable background may be refused. The court does not, however, impose a rigid bar on repetition; the individual case remains decisive.
A second limit is already drawn by older case law. According to a leading decision of the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Federal Labour Court), the interim reference is not intended to procure evidence for separate proceedings running alongside (judgment of 21.01.1993, case no. 6 AZR 171/92). Unfair dismissal proceedings are different: there the need to apply for jobs while the dispute over the termination is pending can carry the compelling reason on its own.
In practice, employers will rarely be able to show that an employee is in truth pursuing nothing but procedural aims.
Unsure whether you are entitled to an interim reference?
Whether the claim exists depends on the reason you give and on how specifically the other side calls it into question. For employers there is a further point: an interim reference once issued is binding in substance and shapes later disputes over the final reference.
If you are an employee who needs an interim reference, or an employer who has to decide on such a request, I offer you a short, free initial assessment. In that conversation we clarify how your situation should be assessed and which next steps make sense.
