Letter from the table: Make the first hire easier to price and register

To the Team Council

I support the proposed Fair Hiring Cost Standard. I am writing from Leipzig, where this spring I tried to turn a few hours of help each week into a proper first job. I wanted to do it formally. What slowed me down was not reluctance to employ someone. It was trying to understand the full cost and sequence of obligations before I could responsibly make the offer.

On 12 February 2026, I began keeping a First Ten Hires diary. I wrote down every question that came up, every call I made, and every amount I had to reserve. I had expected to compare a proposed gross wage with what I could afford. Instead, I discovered that the gross wage was only the first line in the calculation.

My first realistic plan was for a person to work 20 hours a week at €16 an hour. That comes to about €1,387 gross per month when averaged across the year. I set aside roughly another €330 for the employer’s share of social-insurance contributions, then allowed for accident insurance and the levies that apply to employers. Those last amounts depend on the applicable arrangements, so I treated my figure as a planning estimate, not a universal rate. My working monthly total was about €1,740 before equipment, holiday cover, or any payroll-administration cost.

That number was not the surprise. The surprise was how many separate steps I needed to understand before I could know whether it was a safe commitment.

The work behind the number

On 18 February, I listed what I thought I needed to do. I learned that I would need a Betriebsnummer from the Federal Employment Agency, and that social-security registration and reporting would need to be handled through the relevant procedures, normally using payroll software or an authorised service. The employee’s health-insurance fund acts as the collection point for social contributions. I also needed to account for wage-tax registration and reporting through ELSTER, and for the relevant accident-insurance institution.

Each item is understandable on its own. Together, they made it hard to answer a basic question: “If I say yes to this job, what do I have to do, by when, and how much cash must already be available?” I did not want to guess and risk missing a filing or paying late. So on 23 February I asked a tax adviser to check my plan. I paid €95 for an initial consultation. That was useful, but it was another up-front cost before there was any employee or revenue from the work.

On 3 March I made a checklist with dates and amounts. I included the gross wage, the estimated employer contributions, a buffer for accident insurance and levies, and €35 a month for payroll support. I also noted that the wage itself would not be the only cash-flow commitment: contributions and tax deductions have their own reporting and payment timetable. The checklist helped. It did not make the process simple, but it stopped the questions from living in my head as one large, frightening unknown.

On 16 March I decided I could proceed, provided I kept enough reserve for several months of payroll and the associated costs. That was a business decision, not a lack of interest in hiring. I had planned the wage first; I had to revise the plan around the complete employer cost and the work of becoming an employer.

What would have changed the decision

The Fair Hiring Cost Standard would not mean that a first employee costs nothing, or that legal protections should be weakened. It would mean that a small employer can see the cost and complete the necessary steps without assembling the answer from scattered instructions and separate services.

I support the Council’s proposals for phased social contributions for a business’s first ten hires, one-stop payroll registration, and predictable rules. I would add a practical implementation tool: a “first hire” pathway that gives the employer one dated checklist and one cost estimate before the employment begins.

• Start with the proposed hours, gross wage, location, and intended start date. Show an estimated employer cost, with statutory contributions separated from costs that vary by sector or individual circumstances.

• Explain which registration comes first, including how to obtain a Betriebsnummer, and which steps involve the health-insurance fund, ELSTER, and accident insurance.

• Give the employer a calendar of reporting and payment deadlines, with reminders and links to the relevant official portals. Make clear where a tax adviser or payroll professional is useful, rather than implying that every small employer must buy the same service.

• For the first ten hires, show any phased contribution relief directly in the estimate, including when it begins, when it ends, and what the employer must do to qualify.

The pathway should work in plain language and be available before a contract is signed. It should also be maintained by the institutions that administer the steps, so a small employer does not have to decide which version of an old checklist is still current.

I am not asking for hiring to become risk-free. Hiring always means taking responsibility for another person’s livelihood. I am asking for the rules around that responsibility to be legible early enough that a small business can make a sound promise—and keep it.

My position is simple: make the first hire easier to price, easier to register, and easier to do correctly. I support the Fair Hiring Cost Standard.