The relief package decided by the black-red coalition is causing quite a stir. In particular, the tax- and duty-free bonus of up to 1,000 euros is predominantly commented on with skepticism or rejection. And for a variety of reasons.
The relief bonus is being discussed particularly lively on social media. For example, a Linkedin post by Janine Kordes, managing director of Kieler Seifen GmbH and entrepreneur in the industrial cleaning sector, generated over 500 comments within a very short time. Kordes addresses Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) directly: What sounds like a friendly option to him is “often received as a clear expectation” by employees. “And this means that political symbolism very quickly becomes operational explosives,” she writes. Many companies are currently struggling with the question not of whether they want to pay an extra 1,000 euros – “but of whether they will even still exist in six months”.
Premium could emphasize social division
This assessment is widely reflected in the comments. An anonymous commentator who says he has 25 years of HR experience writes that the conversations after such political announcements are “the same every time”: the bonus is sold in the media as a relief for employees. The message that comes across in the workforce is: “I’m entitled to something.” However, it is not the federal government that has to explain that this is not an obligation, but rather the employers that have to take on this job.
Raoul Roßmann, spokesman for the management of the Rossmann drugstore chain, differentiates in his comment: Anyone who can pay should do so. However, he warns of a dimension of social division: In families in which one partner works for a high-performing company and the other works for an automotive supplier in crisis, the bonus becomes a “magnifying glass for the division between the companies that are still able and those that have long since just struggled to survive.” Rossmann plans to pay its employees emergency aid of 500 euros at the “as soon as possible,” while sales aides will receive 250 euros.
HR between expectation pressure and uncertainty
The Federal Association of Human Resources Managers (BPM) speaks out explicitly from an HR perspective. Presidium member Aude Masserann sees the relief bonus as a fundamentally proven instrument, but when asked by human resources management, points out the difficult environment: “In many companies, appropriate funds are currently not planned, at the same time human resources departments are under considerable cost pressure, and at the moment this leeway is simply not available in the personnel budgets.” In addition, there is not only a financial burden, but also an administrative burden, which entails additional bureaucratic effort.
The question of expectation management is particularly pressing: Since the legal framework has not yet been finally clarified, HR managers must provide guidance today. At the same time, pressure of expectations is building up among the workforce, which must be actively managed. “It’s not just a question of ‘if’, but rather about comprehensible criteria, consistent decisions and communication that ensures trust – especially towards those who cannot benefit.”
In order for the bonus to have the broadest and fairest possible impact, the BPM is demanding three points: rapid legal clarity so that companies can make well-founded decisions; sufficient implementation periods for planning security and flexibility in tight budget situations as well as accompanying measures for structurally disadvantaged areas.
Masserann’s conclusion: HR managers must “make decisions under uncertainty, take economic conditions into account and at the same time manage expectations and represent a fair and transparent line in the company. It is precisely in such situations that the role of HR becomes apparent as a stabilizing factor in the company and as a bridge between economic reality and social demands.”
Associations: design errors and false expectations
Outside the HR scene, the large employers’ and business associations are sometimes sharply critical of the package. Steffen Kampeter, General Manager of the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations (BDA), judges: “The coalition promises relief and delivers burdens for companies.” He warns that the bonus should not lead to an increase in labor costs and emphasizes: “It is unrealistic to assume that all companies can pay the bonus. The economic situation is too tense.” In addition, there was great surprise among employers that this measure – unlike the inflation compensation bonus for 2022 – had not been agreed in advance with the collective bargaining parties.
Crafts President Jörg Dittrich takes the same line: Politicians are actually shifting a significant part of the responsibility for relieving citizens’ burdens onto employers. “In view of the fragile economic situation, it remains unclear how many companies will actually be able to make use of this due to their strained earnings and liquidity situation.”
Marcus Nachbauer, Chairman of the Federal Association of the Construction Industry, is even clearer: “The planned tax- and duty-free relief bonus for employees may sound good politically – economically it is unrealistic for many companies.” His conclusion: “Only what has been previously earned can be distributed.”
Effect depends on collective bargaining rounds
The union side is also skeptical, but for different reasons. The DGB chairwoman Yasmin Fahimi sees fundamental potential in the bonus, but ties her support to clear conditions: “The relief bonus can be a good support for collective bargaining – but only if it is paid in addition to the normal wage. In addition, an extension of the reference period would make sense in order to give as many employees as possible access, given the different terms of collective agreements.”
Verdi boss Frank Werneke goes even further: Making the planned bonus “of up to 1,000 euros dependent on whether individual employers graciously pay it or not is a completely flawed construction.” Many employees would go away empty-handed.
Sebastian Dullien, scientific director of the Institute for Macroeconomics and Business Cycle Research (IMK), sees the central problem with the bonus elsewhere: “The problem is that for many employees there will no longer be any collective bargaining this year.” He is therefore calling for the bonus to still be payable in 2027.
Public service: open questions
The topic has sparked its own debate in the public service. dbb federal chairman Volker Geyer explained: “If the federal government holds companies accountable here, the state as an employer must set a good example.” Union parliamentary group leader Jens Spahn, on the other hand, rejects a bonus for federal employees, citing the tense financial situation: “I currently see no basis for the federal government to pay a corresponding bonus to its employees. The situation is even more complicated for state employees: their new collective agreement runs until January 2028, so anchoring the bonus there would not be realistic until 2028 at the earliest.
Sven Frost is responsible for HR tech, which includes the areas of digitalization, HR software, time and access, SAP and outsourcing. He also writes about recruiting and employer branding. He continues to be responsible for the editorial planning of various special human resources publications.
