Last week, Dr. Gianluca Grimalda and the Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) accepted the settlement proposed by the Kiel Regional Labor Court in the lawsuit filed by Dr Grimalda for unfair dismissal. The settlement was agreed on during the appeals process, after Dr. Grimalda’s original lawsuit was rejected last February.
Dr. Grimalda: a bittersweet victory
On 9 October 2023, IfW notified Dr. Grimalda of the termination of his research contract due to his failure to return to Germany by plane from his fieldwork in Bougainville, Papua New Guinea.
Although the original plan approved by IfW was for Dr. Grimalda to return by ‘slow travel’, IfW ordered Dr. Grimalda to return by plane after he failed to show up in Kiel on the agreed date. Dr Grimalda claims that his delay was due to visa deferrals, security threats, volcano activity and other logistical impediments.
This was the first known case of an employee being fired for refusing to take a plane to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The settlement stipulates that the contract was terminated with ordinary dismissal because of incompatible ideological convictions between the parties. The immediate termination by IfW was repealed and IfW will exonerate Dr. Grimalda from any breach of contract.
In view of the strained relationship with his employer if the employment relationship were to continue, he agreed to receive a severance payment from IfW when he left his employment relationship.
‘Sad and happy’
Its exact amount can not be disclosed due to a confidentiality agreement. Dr. Grimalda intends to donate 75,000 euros, part of this severance payment, for the purpose of environmental and climate protection and climate crisis activism.
“I feel sad and happy at the same time”, he said:
Sad because I lost a job I loved. Happy because the judge implicitly recognised the impossibility of dismissing an employee because of his refusal to take a plane. I hope that my case will inspire more employees, institutions and companies to actively support the transition from fossil fuel-based economies to decarbonized and people-centered societies.
I am determined to carry on with my research even though the job applications I made this year were unsuccessful. In 2025, I plan to slow-travel to Papua New Guinea again to further investigate the adaptation of the local population to climate change. Once I am back, my work as a climate activist will resume.
“Academics have multiple channels to alert about the climate and biodiversity crisis, and modifying their personal contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is an important way to demonstrate credibility”, says Wolfgang Cramer, Research Director at CNRS, France, and former contributor to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report.
Dr Grimalda, who has been slow-travelling for more than 10 years, calculated that slow-travelling 28,000km from Papua New Guinea to Europe reduced greenhouse gases emissions, responsible for the rise in temperatures and extreme weather events, by a factor of 10 compared to flying.
An uncertain precedent, despite Dr. Grimalda’s outcome
Lawyer Jörn A. Broschat who defended Dr Grimalda in the lawsuit said:
I am pleased that the flawed decision of the first instance could be revised and that ultimately there was no reason for dismissal. Nevertheless, the legal situation remains uncertain for employees who prefer climate-neutral travel.
This case highlights the growing intersection between labor law and climate-conscious practices. It represents a milestone in the emerging discussion about the rights of employees to stand up for their climate principles as part of their professional obligations.
It is time for lawmakers and collective bargaining parties to take these beliefs more into account and enshrine them as labor rights. This is just the beginning of undoubtedly numerous labor law decisions that will address the complex interplay between climate change and the interests of employees and employers.
Featured image supplied
