dismissal

The Aragón justice system has shown how expensive it can be for a company to get involved with dismissal letters: 46,665 euros

by

There are mistakes that can be corrected with a simple apology. And then there are errors that, once committedhave legal consequences that no apology can undo. A freight transport company in Huesca discovered this in the worst possible way when it fired one of its employees, regretted it days later, trying to back down, and then fired him again. All of this while the worker was at home on medical leave. What seemed like an internal bureaucratic mess ended up in court and with compensation of more than 46,000 euros. The dismissal letters the devil carries them. Two layoffs, one leave and fifteen days of chaos. As documented in the sentence In the case that reached the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon, the worker had been in the company since 2011, with an indefinite contract, and had accumulated more than a year of medical leave due to a cervical injury when, on December 14, 2023, he received a burofax from his company informing him of the disciplinary dismissal. As indicated in the dismissal letter, the employee had carried out incompatible activities with his low status. The worker did not take long to react and began the process to challenge the dismissal in court. But then something unexpected happened. On December 20, just six days later, a second burofax arrived in which the company declared that the first dismissal was annulled and that an internal disciplinary file was opened in its place. Not satisfied with this, on December 29 they received a third burofax containing another dismissal letter, this time accompanied by the payroll and the corresponding settlement. Within two weeks, the employee had received two dismissal communications and one cancellation while was still convalescing at home. Why the company wanted to back down. As stated in the ruling, the company argued that the first dismissal had been a procedural error and considered that the initial letter had formal defects related to the applicable collective agreement, since the worker had questioned by email whether the merchandise transportation agreement or the chemical industry agreement should apply. The company’s intention was to annul that first dismissal, open the correct disciplinary file and issue a new letter in order. From his point of view, the only real dismissal was that of December 29, which had never been challenged by the worker. The company also tried to demonstrate to the court that the underlying reason for the dismissal was legitimate: a private detective report recorded the worker carrying out physical activity during his medical leave, which he interpreted as a simulation of the disability or, at least, as a behavior incompatible with recovery. A dismissal letter is not a draft. The problem for the company is that the dismissal letter is not a simple administrative communication with the employee, but is a document with key legal value with which an entire dismissal process begins with very well-defined deadlines and procedures to give maximum guarantees to both companies and employees. He article 55.1 of the Workers’ Statute establishes that disciplinary dismissal must be notified in writing, with the facts that motivate it and the effective date. Once that letter is delivered, a legal mechanism is put in place that neither party can stop unilaterally. The law itself contemplates the possibility for the company to retract the dismissal and provides a way out when a company wants to correct a poorly formulated dismissal, but as stated in article 55.2 of the Workers’ Statute, it is subject to very precise conditions and deadlines. Furthermore, it is only admitted if, during that rectification period, the company keeps the worker registered with Social Security and pays them all salaries. In this case, the ruling states that it was not proven that the company had complied with that requirement, which blocked this means of rectification. Without the worker’s acceptance, there is no turning back. On the other hand, and beyond the administrative procedures, there is an additional requirement that the company did not comply with in its process of rectification of the first dismissal: for the employment relationship to be restored, the worker who has been dismissed must expressly accept it. It is not enough for the company to declare on its own that the dismissal is without effect. The Supreme Court already established that a communicated dismissal determines that the worker is not obliged to accept any subsequent retraction from the company, and that claiming before the courts in that situation does not constitute any type of abuse. In this case, the employee did not explicitly accept the annulment of the first dismissal or return to his position. The email he sent to the company questioning the applicable collective agreement was not considered by the court as a tacit acceptance of the withdrawal, but rather as confirmation of his dismissal status. The employment relationship, in the eyes of the law, had been terminated on December 14 and no subsequent communication from the company could change that unilaterally. The outcome: more than 46,000 euros in compensation. The TSJ of Aragón also ruled out the argument about physical activity during sick leave. It was proven that the outputs recorded by detective They were walks or runs of about 40 minutes of moderate duration that, according to the medical assessment, were not contraindicated for the worker’s recovery from the cervical injury. With all these arguments on the table, the court declared the dismissal inadmissible, the first, because the second no longer had any legal value, and established compensation of 46,665.34 euros, calculated based on age of the worker. The company appealed that decision to the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon, which confirmed it in its entirety and also ordered it to pay 800 euros in costs. Dismissal letters, especially if they are not well formulated, are carried by the devil. In Xataka | He had been in the same notary office for 16 years and was fired for not passing the trial period: the Supreme Court ended up seeing the … Read more

“Being a gossip” is enough reason for dismissal for the director of a bank branch

by

They say that curiosity killed the cat, and if that curiosity belongs to the director of a CaixaBank office, it is most likely that her position is in danger. As an example of this, the person in charge of an office of that entity in a small town in Gerona who was fired for “gossiping” about the bank details of people in her town. The courts called it fraud and breach of trust. The case reached the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia, which confirmed that the disciplinary dismissal It was completely justified. Curiosity killed the cat. As detailed in the sentence issued By the Catalan Superior Court of Justice, in November 2023, CaixaBank detected anomalous accesses to its customer database. The director of the Les Preses (Gerona) office had been accessing clients’ banking information without apparent justification. An internal audit revealed the magnitude of the problem: between November 3, 2022 and December 11, 2023, management had made inquiries about 170 different clients on 210 different days. The most serious thing was the pattern since of those 170 clients consulted, 84 were family members or people in their close circle, and 121 lived in the same town where the director lived. The searches were done mainly by first and last name, something very unusual in banking operations normal in which the user’s ID is used to avoid confusion between users with identical first and last names. The explanations that did not convince anyone. When the audit investigated the accesses, the director tried to justify herself. First he said it was common to review customer accounts at other offices to confirm that cash transfers between users had been completed correctly. He then stated that some customers had asked him for help because they had had access problems from the application of the mobile. But as more information became known, those excuses began to lose foundation. The bank confirmed before the court that the majority of those 170 clients had connected through the mobile application on the same day that the director consulted their accounts, which showed that they did not need its intervention. Without arguments, all he was left with was the truth: she was a gossip. Finally, the worker admitted that she had consulted this data because of “xafardería”, a Catalan term that means simple curiosity or gossip. She acknowledged that she had not done so at the clients’ request nor was she looking for specific information, but rather motivated by curiosity to know the payments and financial movements of her family, friends and neighbors. He also assured that I had not shared that information with nobody. However, this confession was not enough to save him from the consequences: immediate disciplinary dismissal. There was abuse of trust and the TSJC confirmed it. CaixaBank did not hesitate to act when the conclusions of the internal investigation were known. On January 31, 2024, he was notified of his disciplinary dismissal on the grounds that his actions constituted a “very serious breach of contractual good faith, fraud and abuse of trust”, in accordance with the provisions of article 54.2.d) of the Workers’ Statute and article 76.4 of the current Collective Agreement for savings banks and financial entities. The Social Court number 1 of Figueras supported this decision on July 26, 2024. The worker tried to appeal to the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia, but the court rejected all her arguments. The court concluded that “there is no justification” for these consultations and that the conduct “contradicted the code of ethics and the confidentiality regulations that must govern a business as sensitive as banking.” The sentence left no room for doubt, declaring the dismissal proper and definitive. A lesson in trust and responsibility. As and how they stand out in the specialized environment Economist & Juristthis case leaves important lessons about how access to sensitive information in a financial institution is a privilege that carries responsibility. The director had received training on data protection and the code of ethics, so she was fully aware of the rules she was breaking. His position in the office gave him access to private data of hundreds of people, and used that access to sensitive information to satisfy simple curiosity. Due to the recurrence of the consultations, the courts understood that this was not an isolated case, but rather a deliberate pattern of conduct that violated the trust placed in it by the entity and its clients. In Xataka | The EU has once again taken a look at the Spanish labor market and has once again reminded Spain of something: firing is too cheap Image | Unsplash (Rodrigo Rodrigues)

Europe has been warning for years that firing in Spain is a bargain. Now Congress is making a move with the “restorative dismissal”

by

Unfair dismissal in Spain is a bargain for companies. At least that is what the European Committee of Social Rights (CEDS), dependent on the Council of Europe, has been telling Spain for years. Throughout this time, the Government has turned a deaf ear to the recommendations from Brussels. However, an unexpected turn caused by the mistake of a representative of the Popular Party During a vote in Congress, a Non-Law Proposal (PNL) by Sumar was allowed to prosper, which urges the Government to present a bill to reform the laws that prevent the application of the restorative dismissal that Europe has actively and passively requested. Europe has been warning since 2021. When Spain ratified in 2021 the European Social Charterassumed the commitment to harmonize its labor legislation with its principles. Since then, the European Committee of Social Rights (CEDS), an advisory body of the Council of Europe, has reiterated that the Spanish system, based on a fixed calculation of 33 days per year worked and a maximum of 24 months, does not meet the criteria of said commitment. The problem is that the European Social Charter is a set of guidelines, but it is not binding, and the CEDS is a consultative body, so it cannot demand legislative modifications from Spain. Its resolutions are recommendations, valuable from a legal and political point of view, but without executive force. This lack of obligation has allowed Spain to postpone reforms that would change the way compensation is calculated for employees for unfair dismissal. The cornerstone: article 24. The point of greatest friction to undertake the reforms is found in article 24 of the European Social Charter. It requires “the right of workers dismissed without valid reason (unfair dismissal) to adequate compensation or other appropriate relief.” This means ensuring that compensations to employees for unfair dismissal must be “appropriate and dissuasive”. Something that, as a general rule, does not occur in the system of fixed compensation that is currently applied in all judicial processes for unfair dismissal. This time the request has not come from Europe. Despite having dictated different resolutions and requestsnothing has changed in Europe’s position, nor has it gained power to force Spain to implement the legislative changes. However, what has changed is internal politics. In September, a Non-Law Proposition promoted by Sumar managed to get ahead thanks to the voting error of a PP deputy, repeating the scene that in 2022 allowed approve the labor reform. This NLP does not modify the law itself, but it does urge the Government to begin the legislative process to adapt the regulations to the European framework. This implies the opening of a social dialogue table with unions and employers and, subsequently, the preparation of a bill that must return to Congress to be voted on. The reform of the regulations to legislate unfair dismissals, therefore, is still a long way off, but for the first time the Executive is obliged to put it on the table. “Restorative dismissal” is not a type of dismissal. Among all the CEDS recommendations, none has generated as much debate as the so-called restorative dismissal. The name can lead to confusion: it is not a new category of dismissal as the disciplinarynull or inadmissible, but refers to a proposal to transform How compensation is calculated when a dismissal is declared unfair. Europe considers that the current Spanish system is too predictable and, in many cases, insufficient. The result is that companies can treat unfair dismissal as a more or less easy cost to assume and choose which employees or how many to dismiss based on the cost of the operation. Restorative dismissal causes this calculation to vary from one employee to another and is under the sole discretion of a judge, which would prevent companies from calculating in advance the final cost of the dismissal. What is restorative dismissal?. As its name indicates, restorative dismissal is a model that seeks to individualize the severance payment to the specific damage it causes to the dismissed employee, instead of an automatic calculation based in days per year worked. Judges could assess specific factors in each case, taking into account factors such as the age and social situation of the worker, the real probability of re-entering the labor market, the economic and personal impact of the dismissal, or the size, solvency, or economic capacity of the dismissing company. Based on these factors, for example, a 60-year-old worker with children and a 24-year-old single worker who were fired by the same company in similar positions would obtain different compensation because, statistically, the older one would have less likely to return to the labor market than the young person. Europe understands that this flexibility is essential to repair the real damage of dismissal and to act as a preventive mechanism. Deterrence, protection and less business calculation. The objective of restorative dismissal is not only to better compensate the worker based on the impact caused, but also to discourage the appeal of unfair dismissal and that, if companies really have economic problems that justify dismissals, they do so through dismissals for objective reasons. If the cost is no longer predictable, the company loses the ability to make profitability calculations. This protection measure especially affects precarious groups who, due to their low salary or short seniority, are very cheap to fire: young people, women and precarious workers. Furthermore, Europe insists that the reinstatement after dismissal inadmissible should no longer be optional for the company as it is currently, and should become a real possibility imposed by the court when it is appropriate. Restoration, in this sense, is not only economic, but also labor-related. Justice has its hands tied. Despite Europe’s insistence, the Spanish courts have rejected impose compensation higher than the current scale included in the article 56 of the Workers’ Statute. The reason was not a lack of judicial will, but the absence of a legal framework that would allow additional compensation to be established without generating legal uncertainty. In Xataka | … Read more

Nestlé has announced the dismissal of 16,000 employees and its CEO has revealed the reason: “we will automate our processes”

by

Nestlé has announced the layoff of 16,000 employees worldwide, and it will fall especially on so-called “white collar” jobs. Among the reasons that the company argues through of a statement one stands out: “We are evolving and will simplify our organization and automate our processes.” The decision has generated uncertainty both globally and in Spain, where its Spanish subsidiary has more than 4,000 employees and several factories. However, the most surprising thing is that, for the first time, it is a food company and not technological who makes a decision of this nature: cut jobs to flatten the organization and automate office roles. Change to a more aggressive dome. Nestlé has taken a drastic turn in its internal policy by announcing the elimination of 16,000 positions of work. That represents about 6% of its total global workforce. This decision has surprised the markets, since it occurs just after having presented results that show growth in its income and sales throughout 2025. Shortly after, its new CEO Philipp Navratil explained on your LinkedIn profile the company’s determined commitment to automate and digitize its processes under a cost reduction plan driven by the new direction of the company. In fact, the previous board already had an adjustment plan in place in which 541.4 million euros were going to be saved. With the new management leadership, the savings objective has doubled to 1,082.8 million euros by 2027. The layoffs are no longer due to economic problems. When a company announced layoffs, they were usually associated with a bad economic situation. However, as we have seen in different technology companies such as Amazon, Google or Microsoft, layoffs and finances are already They are not necessarily related. In the case of Nestlé, the company recorded organic sales growth of 3.3% in the first nine months of 2025, consolidating its figures in different global markets. As Navratil explained, the main argument for the layoffs is the company optimization to prepare it for a future competitive scenario and, to this end, it was going to focus on simplifying the organization and automating processes (with AI?) when appropriate. The same argument that big technology They have been using it for months in the context of the race for AI. Distribution of layoffs and their impact. As confirmed by Nestlé, the layoffs will mainly affect “white collar” workers and around 12,000 employees will be in the office and administrative functions, while around 4,000 more layoffs will be distributed between production and supply chain departments. The company has not detailed the exact geographical distribution of the layoffs, which maintains uncertainty in key markets such as Spain, where staff and unions have shown concern about the possibility of factories closing or production being reduced in certain cities. Nestlé employs around 4,000 employees in Spain in 10 production centers in five autonomous communities: Cantabria, Asturias, Extremadura, Galicia and Catalonia. In Xataka | Big Tech doesn’t stop firing its engineers. At the same time, they have stepped on the accelerator in hiring Image | Nestle

Billing record, dismissal avalanche

by

The Spanish video game sector exceeded 2,400 million euros in turnover in 2024. A historical record that hides a bitter reality: mass layoffs, emblematic studies closures and the first sector strike in history. The panoramic. Spain is the third European market and one of the ten World Cups. More than 22 million people play 75 minutes average and revenues grew 3%. But the industry is fractured: multinationals with record benefits while national studies fall into chain. Between bambalins. The closure of Tequila Works and Novaramatwo of the most emblematic studies in Spain, has been only the tip of the iceberg. The list continues to grow every month. The pattern is repeated: foreign multinationals buy Spanish studies promising growth and stability, and then close or jibarize their templates when business priorities change. The backdrop. Pandemia created a bubble of unreal expectations. The consumption of video games shot 75% during confinement, and that attracted huge investments that expected perpetual growth. But when the world returned to normal, the demand stabilized. By then, business structures had grown excessively. Investors have retired almost 20% in the last two years and large technological ones have responded with mass dismissals: Xbox and PlayStation They accumulate thousands of layoffs this year. Electronic Arts, a almost 700. Globally, more than 14,000 Workers lost their employment in 2024. In 2025 the account continues. Yes, but. The sector continues to generate opportunities. Scopely has opened a HUB In Barcelona With 700 employees. Electronic Arts announced last year The creation of 600 positions in Madrid. The most agile small studies find profitable niches. But these exceptions do not compensate the general bleeding: More than half of Spanish studies invoice less than 200,000 euros per year. The threat. The AI ​​looms over the sector. King used his own workers to create an AI tool that designs levels, as they said The countryand now that same tool replaces them. Microsoft has made it clear that AI will be its “new great mission”, justifying 9,000 layoffs despite achieving record benefits. The workers from Asian countries charge half that Europeans. IA tools promise to reduce development costs by 40%. Investment funds require immediate profitability, not long -term creative projects. What is being said. “It is a crisis with capital letters,” acknowledges the Spanish Association of Developing Companies in a report of eldiario.es. The CSVI union It is more direct: “Our main work is now to accompany in all you are that are being produced.” Workers denounce a systematic pattern of “buying, squeezeing and throwing” by multinationals. The industry claims tax incentives similar to those of the audiovisual sector, which in other European countries reach 30%. Without them, they warn, Spain will lose competitiveness against France, Germany or the United Kingdom, which are already attracting investments with better conditions. Decisive moment. The Spanish video game industry is located at a crossroads. Or it reinvents itself with a more sustainable model that protects local talent and creativity, or will be reduced by cheap labor for multinationals that can close the tap at any time. In Xataka | There are Spanish studies of authentic guerrillas programming games for nes: ‘Malasombra’ is the last example Outstanding image | King

Europe has insisted that Spain must change its laws for unfair dismissal: it is too cheap

by

It is not the first time that from Europe There is a pull of ears to the Spanish regulations that apply to those cases in which it is incurred in an inadmissible dismissal and, therefore, that companies must compensate or readmit to workers. In your opinion, the Bars that applies Spain in these cases are insufficient and workers are not protected. The European Social Rights Committee He has just answered to the complaint filed in November 2022 by CCOO. The resolution of this body is not binding or sanctioning, so it must be read more as a recommendation than as a reprimand from Europe. What has Europe said. The European Social Rights Committee, an organ dependent on the Council of Europe, considers in its resolution that “there is a violation of article 24.b of the letter”, in reference to article 24 of the European Social Charter than Spain ratified in 2021 and whose objective was to harmonize the labor legislation of the EU member countries. In this article 24, the Council of Europe recommended, “the right of dismissed workers for no valid reason (inadmissible dismissal) to adequate compensation or other appropriate reparation.” Therefore, the Council’s decision follows the path of the first resolution with which he responded to the UGT demand in 2022insisting that the dismissal compensation system is not repair. At CCOO, the Council He has spoken on the compensation of the TEMPORARY PERSONNEL OF ADMINISTRATIONS in fraud of law that, as in the case of inadmissible dismissals, They are considered insufficient. On the other hand, the demand for CCOO also puts the focus on which Spanish legislation does not offer sufficient guarantees so that employees dismissed in the improper way must be readmitted in your position. The EU establishes that this is a point that Spain must reinforce in its labor regulations. Why are compensation insufficient? The Committee considers to establish A universal scale Like the one applied in Spain, with fixed compensation of 33 days per year worked with a maximum of 24 monthly payments, it does not serve to “repair the damage suffered by the victim in all cases and be deterrent to the employer.” In its resolution it is explained that in the calculation of these compensation the specific circumstances of each case are not taken into account (a dismissal is not the same to a 60 -year -old person than someone of 20 years, members of a single -parent family, etc.). In the brief, it is considered that a fixed allocation system allows companies calculate the convenience of dismissalthus eliminating the deterrence for the employer when the dismissal is not done due to justified objective causes, and is unfair for workers with Minor contracts. In addition, the little weight of the readmission and the fact that this is an option that is only offered to companies, and not to the employee who has lost its job for no justified reason. What do they say in Spain? In a Union statementUnai Sordo, general secretary of CCOO, insisted that this writing “what is at stake is the compatibility of the dismissal model in Spain with the European Social Charter. From now on there are only two paths: not do anything and let the jurisprudence resolve case by case, or open a tripartite, mature and responsible negotiation, that adapts our dismissal regime to the European social standards.” For its part, Yolanda Díaz has shared From your profile In Bluesky your disposition “to open social dialogue table” to adapt legislation on dismissal in Spain and comply with what is recorded by Spain. “The inadmissible dismissal has to comply with the European Social Charter. Without excuses. It is in the Government Agreement and will be a reality,” said the head of the Ministry of Labor. It should be remembered that, in a parliamentary response of 2024, the current government assured that Article 56 of the Workers’ Statute “It is already consistent with article 24 of the European Social Charter, providing adequate reparation to dismissed workers without valid reason (inadmissible dismissal), so a modification of the regulation in this regard is not expected and, therefore, particular effects on vulnerable groups or on small and medium enterprises are not estimated.” How is it being managed now. At present, if an employee considers that his dismissal is inadmissible he must go to the judicial means, and it will be the court who establishes the regulations to be applied. In this context, employees cannot claim Additional compensation to the one already marked by the legislation in relation to the years worked, as CCOO denounces in its demand and supports article 24 of the European Social Charter. On very few occasions, the courts have preferred to opt for the prerogative of admitting international legislation over the state, so it is expected that, as of July 16, the Supreme Court will rule on this situation and establish a doctrine. Until now, the High Court considered that it was not possible increase this compensation by judicial means. In addition, although it is true that the courts always offer readmission alternatives or Payment of the assigned compensationthis decision remains in the hands of the company, which in the vast majority of cases chooses to pay compensation. What the Council recommends in this case is that the election falls on the employee and choose if you want to return to an employee from which it has been fired without objective reasons. In Xataka | 55,245 euros for eating a sandwich and a beer: Mercadona must compensate an employee for unfair dismissal Image | Unspash (Antoine Schibler, Manuel)

Some Tesla employees requested Elon Musk’s dismissal in a public letter. The company responded with fulminating dismissals

by

In recent months the situation of Tesla It has been complicated for a series of catastrophic misfortunes. Some of them were predictable, such as the punctual fall in sales before The renewal of its supervent model, the Model and. Others, on the other hand, have been entirely unexpected. As the reputational crisis that has collapsed the sales of the brand’s cars worldwide by the Elon Musk’s political implication and his role Doge front. The Tesla crisis not only manifested outside doors. The Sales fall And the growing discontent among employees have triggered an internal crisis between the template unprecedentedputting Elon Musk in the center of the hurricane. Employees They claimed Elon Musk’s departure of the company’s management. That petition has resulted in dismissals, but not that of his CEO. An unsustainable situation even for the template The internal tension reached its peak when a group of Employees from Tesla, both current and old, decided to publicly express their discontent with the management of the company. They did it through an open letter Published on the Web “Tesla Employees Against Elon”. In the publication, employees and small shareholders who had been part of the Tesla staff directly requested the departure of Elon Musk as the company’s CEO. “We are at a crossroads: continue with Elon as CEO of Tesla and face a greater decline as customers leave the brand, or advance without it and allow our products and mission to succeed or fail for themselves,” he explained in the workers’ statement. The signatories They pointed out that the damage Musk’s personal brand is “irreversible” and that his figure as the maximum representative of Tesla has become In a load for the entire template. Employees reproach their main manager His intention to “rename” In the Tesla direction, and they consider it “insulting” for being an explicit recognition that Tesla’s problems are the result of its neglect of functions at the head of the company. “Let’s be clear: we are not the problem. Our products are not the problem. Our engineering, service and delivery teams are not the problem. The problem is demand. The problem is Elon,” said the statement. More electric, but less Tesla While the electric vehicle market grows at a good pace, Tesla’s sale figures do not give signs of recovery. In Spain, the brand already registers falls of more than 16% and none of Tesla’s models appears among the 10 best -selling electric cars In Spain. According to data April of the Spanish Association of Automobile and Truck Manufacturers (ANFAC) The electrified tourism market grew 79% last month, which represents a 6.5% sales increase with respect to the same period last year. The phenomenon is not limited to Spain. Reuters echoed the latest data from the global electric vehicle market, which in April had grown by 29% year -on -year, despite uncertainty for tariffs imposed by the US. The US electric car market also records upward values. The data of Cox Automotive indicate a Growth of 18.5% In the volume of new electric car sales month by month, while the Tesla market share fell five points to 42%. The data announced in its presentation of Results of the first 2025 quartercorroborated this downward trend. The manufacturer delivered 336,681 vehicles, which represented a 13% drop with respect to the same period of the previous year, when almost 387,000 units had been delivered. As the employees pointed out in their open letter, “this is not due to the fact that our cars have worsened. It is not due to affordability problems. But to the fact that people no longer want to associate with Elon. Production marches better than ever. Quality is high. Processes are solid. Demand is what fails. It is not a product problem. It is a Leadership problem“ Tesla’s response: layoffs Tesla’s address to the publication of the letter was immediate and forceful. According to published Business Insiderseveral critical employees with Musk They were fulminating. This manufacturer’s reaction has generated even more Fear and self -censorship Within the company, reviving accusations of repression and contradiction with speech “Absolutist of Freedom of Expression“That Musk itself defends publicly. One of the most prominent cases is that of Matthew Labrot, former responsibility of Sales and Delivery Training of Tesla, and one of the main drivers of the protest. Labrot declared in Business Insider Being a passionate defender of Tesla, but was fired in less than 24 hours after the open letter on the website and participating in the protest under the motto “Pro Tesla, Not Elon!”, whose Account in x It has been suspended. Despite having lost his job in Tesla, Labrot says that “I still believe firmly in the company and in the objective we pursue”, but maintains its critical position with the Musk’s negative influence in the company and in its public image. In Xataka | If the question is which car will not leave you lying on the road, the German experts are clear: the electric Image | Flickr (Gage Skidmore, Geoff Livingston)

Mercadona must compensate an employee for inadmissible dismissal

by

Mercadona applies a strict work discipline to its employees. Sometimes, breach some of these strict labor policies derive in disciplinary dismissals. A sanction that the courts have already described as “excessive and disproportionate” On other occasions. The Superior Court of Justice of Madrid has declared inadmissible the dismissal of a Mercadona employee after being accused of consuming a beer in your rest time. Therefore, the supermarket must compensate the employee who, during her breakfast pause, ate a chicken sandwich accompanied by a beer. What happened? As reflected in The judgment issued For the TSJM, the farewell employee occupied the functions of manager to since 2001 in the section “Ready to eat”, with an annual salary of 28,006.21 euros and was fired on June 29, 2023 through a communication in which they claimed disciplinary causes. The key events date back to June 21, 2023, when the person responsible for her turn informed that the employee allegedly smelled of alcohol when she presented to work. However, the coordinator verified that there was no such smell, but that the worker used a colony and chewed gum, something that, everything is said, also prohibited the employees of Mercadona. This served him for the person responsible to point out this detail. On June 27 and during her break for breakfast, the employee bought “a cold beer and a chicken sandwich” and ate it inside her car inside the parking lot for the company’s employees. When he finished, he left his vehicle, he threw the containers to the paper and prepared to return to his position in the established deadlines. The coordinator witnessed the scene, picked up the paper packaging and required the presence of the employee in his office. There, the employee acknowledged having drunk An Mahou beer of 50 CL with alcohol during your breakfast pause, signing a document in which the event was recorded. That same day, she was sent home before finishing her workday. Disciplinary dismissal. In his allegation, Mercadona claimed that the behavior of the employee contravened the rules established in the Article 39.3 of your collective agreement On very serious offenses. In its epigraph specifies: “Go to work or work under obvious symptoms of alcohol or drug o Consumption in the workplace of narcotic substances, or when the behaviors acquire the status of usual and negatively affect the performance of their work, as well as, they constitute a serious risk to the integrity of the working person or other people of the company or alien to this. “ Among the sanctions provided for very serious offenses that are included in article 40 of that same collective agreement, it is established that employees incurring this type of faults face: suspension of employment and salary of sixteen days up to sixty days or The dismissal. Among all possible sanctions, they opted for the most expeditious: The disciplinary dismissal. The Judgment of the TSJM. In a first trial, Social Court No. 7 of Madrid determined that the worker’s behaviors did not justify the disciplinary dismissal. Judgment that Mercadona raised in a supplicatory to the TSJM that now ratifies it. As stated in the sentence, the supermarket did not present conclusive evidence that the employee had been under the influence of alcohol or that her behavior affects her work performance, which led to declare dismissal inadmissible. The Court based its sentence to which the measure adopted by Mercadona did not respect the principles of proportionality and good contractual faith. Disproportionate sanction. Mercadona argued that the worker had incurred a serious offense, adjusting to article 55 of the Workers Statutebut the judges concluded that the facts that were caused by dismissal were not serious enough as to justify a measure as extreme as dismissal. The Superior Court of Madrid recalled in his letter that the good faith must prevail both for the worker and for the employer, and that the analysis of any breach must consider not only the act in itself, but also the context and proportionality of the sanction. The Court stressed that the decision to say goodbye must be reasonable and proportional, considering the seriousness of the behavior, its context and the human factor. He also stressed that there were no signs of drunkenness in the worker or prove that her alcohol consumption in rest time affects the performance of her functions, even if she used potentially dangerous tools such as knives or machinery. Therefore, the resource filed by Mercadona was dismissed. Readmission or compensation. By declaring the inadmissibility of dismissal, Mercadona must now opt between two alternatives: readmit to the employee under the same working conditions prior to dismissal and pay the wages that he stopped receiving from the date of dismissal, or with the sum of 55,245.13 euros for compensation. Although Juan Roig’s supermarket chain has not spoken about the meaning of his decision, his decisions in previous sentences suggest that Mercadona will choose to pay compensation since he does not usually readmit to the dismissed employees. In Xataka | 40,000 euros for a croquette: Mercadona dismissed an employee for eating a croquette and must now compensate him Image | Unspash (Calitore), Wikimedia Commons (Daiima)

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.