Norway: Overtime Pay for Part-Time Employees from the First Hour of Additional Work

Under Norwegian law, part-time employees are, as a starting point, only entitled to overtime pay once they have worked the same number of hours as a full-time employee. The Norwegian now appears to be challenged by case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which indicates that applying one common threshold for overtime entitlement may constitute unlawful discrimination.

In light of the CJEU rulings, trade unions in Norway have argued that part-time employees should be entitled to overtime pay from the first hour worked beyond their agreed employment percentage. To clarify the issue, the unions have initiated several legal proceedings, and the first judgments from the Norwegian District Courts have now been delivered.

 

The Position Under Norwegian Law

The Working Environment Act caps ordinary working hours at nine hours per 24 hours and 40 hours per seven days (often 7.5/37.5 under collective bargaining agreements). Work beyond these limits is overtime and triggers an entitlement to overtime supplement. The threshold is identical for part-time and full-time employees: a part-timer must work beyond the limit for a 100 % position before any right to the supplement is engaged — though they remain entitled to ordinary pay for hours worked beyond their agreed percentage.

 

Recent CJEU Rulings

Clause 4 of the EU Part-Time Work Directive (1997) prohibits less favourable treatment of part-time workers, unless this is justified on objective grounds. In Case C-660/20 (Lufthansa) and Joined Cases C-184/22 and C-185/22 (Dialyse), the CJEU held that it constitutes “less favourable” treatment of part-time workers to apply a common threshold for entitlement to overtime pay, whereby eligibility depends on exceeding the same number of working hours irrespective of whether the employee works full-time or part-time.

On this reasoning, trade unions in Norway argue that a common-threshold model constitutes unlawful discrimination. The employer side argues the CJEU decisions are not decisive for the Norwegian rule, and that promoting a full-time culture justifies the rule.

 

The First Norwegian Judgments

As of June 2026, two district court decisions have been handed down. The part-time employee prevailed in both.

The first decision (February 2026) concerned a retail worker who worked part-time. The employee took on a substantial number of additional shifts, far exceeding his agreed employment percentage, on his own initiative and without any instruction or requirement from the employer. In June 2025, the employee claimed entitlement for overtime pay for hours worked beyond his agreed employment percentage.

The court found unlawful discrimination, holding that the voluntary nature of the additional work was irrelevant and rejecting the argument that promoting a full-time culture justified the common threshold; the employee was awarded back-payment of NOK 205,339.72 (approx. 18 500 Euros) plus interest.

In the second decision, a health care worker in an 80 % position reached the same conclusion, with back-payment of NOK 190,023 (approx. 17 000 Euros) plus interest. Both judgments effectively bypasses the national Norwegian rule in favour of the CJEU judgements. However, both judgements are under appeal, so the question is not finally settled.

 

What This Means for Employers

Employers face a risk of back-payment claims. Employees may be entitled to retrospective payment of overtime compensation for up to three years in respect of work performed beyond their agreed part-time employment percentage, even where the employee chose part-time work and requested the additional shifts.

The development also affects part-time employees preferential right to extra shifts. Pursuant to the Working Environment Act Section 14-3 (2) part-time employees have a preferential right to extra shits and the like in the undertaking rather than the employer employing or hiring personnel for this work, unless this significant inconvenience for the undertaking. A duty to pay overtime supplement may constitute a “significant inconvenience”, which can cause the preferential right to fall away — potentially leaving part-timers with fewer shifts.

 

Recommended Action

There matter is not finally settled. As noted above, the judgments have been appealed. In addition, the Government has appointed a working group, who is expected to present its recommendations by 1 September 2026.

Pending clarification, employers must assume a possible obligation to pay overtime supplements (retrospectively and going forward) for work above part-time percentages.