Skip to content

Siemens Energy's controversial firing of union leader sparks legal and labor backlash

Isabella Paape's removal ahead of the March 3 election has unions crying foul. Courts intervene—but can fairness be restored?

The image shows a group of people standing on the road, holding a banner that reads "Kein Grund zu...
The image shows a group of people standing on the road, holding a banner that reads "Kein Grund zu Feiern" in protest against the German government's austerity measures. In the background, there are buildings with windows, a signboard, a banner with text, a crane, and a cloudy sky.

Siemens Energy has sparked controversy by abruptly dismissing works council member Isabella Paape just weeks before key elections. The move has drawn sharp criticism from trade unions and legal experts, who question its legality and timing. Paape, the lead candidate for the Gemeinsam aktiv slate, was removed without explanation and initially barred from all company sites.

The dismissal took place ahead of the March 3 works council elections, where Paape was set to lead her group's campaign. Reports indicate that parts of the existing works council supported her removal without allowing her to respond to the allegations. Labour law specialists have since labelled the decision legally invalid, casting doubt on its fairness.

A court later intervened, granting Paape limited access to the Erlangen and Forchheim plants. Since mid-January 2026, she has been permitted to campaign for three hours daily—between 11 AM and 2 PM—but under strict supervision. Uniformed security staff monitor her interactions with colleagues, and she remains locked out of company digital systems. Plans for an information session on pensions were also blocked, further restricting her outreach.

The incident has alarmed IG Metall, Germany's largest industrial union, which condemned Siemens Energy's actions as scandalous. The case is now seen as a test of how far companies can go to remove unwanted representatives. Debates over worker codetermination have reignited, with many viewing the dismissal as an attempt to silence dissent and influence the election outcome.

The election will proceed on March 3, but the dispute has already overshadowed the process. Paape's restricted campaign and the legal challenges surrounding her dismissal highlight ongoing tensions over worker representation. The outcome could set a precedent for how similar conflicts are handled in future.

Read also:

Latest