This summary shows where German law applies in recruitment even with good intentions. It is not legal advice. Legal position and retrieval date: 13 November 2026.
Good intentions are not the test
The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) aims to prevent or eliminate disadvantage on protected grounds such as ethnic origin, sex, religion, disability, age and sexual identity (section 1). Applicants count as employees (section 6(1)), and the ban applies even where the ground is only assumed (section 7(1)).
Direct disadvantage means worse treatment than a comparable person (section 3(1)). Indirect disadvantage arises where apparently neutral criteria or procedures can put persons with a protected characteristic at a particular disadvantage, unless a legitimate aim justifies them and the means are appropriate and necessary (section 3(2)). The text names no intent.
Job adverts
Under section 11 AGG, a position must not be advertised in breach of the ban. In 8 AZR 402/15 (29 June 2017), the Federal Labour Court ruled on a publisher with nine employees that required "German as mother tongue". The requirement can disadvantage people because of ethnic origin; the publisher did not show that native speaking was necessary. The presumption under section 22 AGG stood; 3,200 euros were awarded. In 8 AZR 604/16 (23 November 2017), "young and dynamic company" described the company, not the staff, and the claim failed.
What studies show
The 2014 SVR study sent 3,588 applications to 1,794 employers. Invitations followed for 20.2 percent of applications with a German-sounding name and 14.6 percent with a Turkish-sounding name. The net difference was significant for car mechatronics (7.4 percentage points) but not for office clerks (3.0), and was 11.2 points in firms with fewer than six employees. Such tests measure the first stage and describe groups of employers, not single companies.
In the anonymised-applications pilot (eight organisations, 8,550 applications), women showed higher invitation rates in several procedures; applicants with a migration background mostly showed no significant differences. The results are indications, not proof.
Burden of proof, deadlines, compensation
If indications suggest disadvantage, the other side must prove there was no breach (section 22 AGG). Claims must be asserted in writing within two months of receiving a rejection (section 15(4) AGG), and a lawsuit filed within three months (section 61b ArbGG). For non-hiring, compensation may not exceed three monthly salaries where the person would not have been hired anyway (section 15(2)); there is no right to be hired (section 15(6)).
The reform (21/6178) would extend the period to four months and create a conciliation body, but is not adopted.
This is a summary. The full German article with all details is at the same address under the German site.