2026 works council elections: guiding transformation projects safely through changes in councils

The next regular works council elections will be taking place between 1 March and 31 May 2026. In many companies, these elections will coincide with a period of profound change: restructuring, digitalisation and IT projects, new working and organisational models, and group-wide efficiency programmes.

This temporal coincidence is not just a marginal issue; it is a structural risk when it comes to the manageability of such projects. This is because the right to co-determination under works constitution law is always linked to the committee currently in office. This means that a change in the works council often threatens to disrupt this co-determination process – with considerable implications for schedules, project logics and escalation risks.

Three central insights for businesses

1. No binding effect without valid agreements

A new works council is not the legal successor to the previous committee. It derives its rights to participate in management directly from the law. As such, only effective collective agreements – especially works agreements, reconciliations of interests and social plans – have a binding effect.

In contrast, mere negotiating drafts, key points “subject to change” or informal agreements rarely survive a works council election. While they may have a stabilising effect in ongoing dialogues, they are not legally binding, and after an election it will often be necessary to restart negotiations. Especially in time-critical transformation projects, this not only leads to delays but also to a qualitative change in the negotiating situation.

2. Continuity is created through procedures, not content

In an election year, it is often no longer possible to secure preliminary decisions on issues cleanly and conclusively – and works constitution law deliberately limits this.

Nevertheless, stability can be organised by other means, namely by “how” co-determination takes place. Framework and procedural agreements governing information obligations, timelines, standard documents, negotiating formats and escalation mechanisms can create a robust process architecture.

When properly drafted, such agreements also bind a newly elected works council without pre-empting its co-determination rights. Rather than “freezing” results, they institutionalise co-determination. In practice, this means that fundamental discussions about procedures take a back seat and negotiations can focus on actual issues.

3. Think in modules rather than solving everything at once

A modular approach combining different tools and separating them according to functions has proven valuable:

• Process-based framework and procedural agreements safeguard the way in which (or “how”) participation takes place.
• Partial agreements define modules that are ready for decision-making, and thus specific parts (or “what”).
• Key issues papers stabilise political agreements on objectives and milestones (or “where” things are heading).

This differentiation allows progress to be put on a legally secure footing without overloading transformation projects under the time pressure of an election year or resorting to legally non-binding declarations of intent.

Strategic assessment: election years are not neutral periods

Works council elections are an inherent part of works constitutions. But for transformation projects they mark a strategically sensitive phase. Businesses that only start to think about safeguarding procedures and project architecture after an election have often already let go of a crucial lever for influencing these.

As illustrated above, in an election year successful projects are not secured primarily by quickly reaching agreements on certain subjects, but by institutional preparation: clear procedures, modular agreements and transparent communication bearing in mind the future works council.

Closing remarks

Transformation projects carried out during an election year call for more than just operational implementation; they need a sound architecture based on works constitution law. While continuity cannot be enforced, it can be organised. Businesses that organise their co-determination beforehand will not have to start from scratch after an election.

A detailed analysis of the legal basis and possible arrangements and risks, including multi-level framework architectures, partial agreements and key issues papers, can be found in the current issue 09 of German business and law journal Der Betrieb.

We are happy to advise companies on designing legally compliant and practical structures for their co-determination to ensure that transformation projects remain manageable during election years.