Three judges gave three different opinions.

In March 2022, a carpentry worker in Girona suffered a heart attack, and was admitted in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Despite his serious medical situation, the company decided to fire him just two days later, while he was still in the ICU. The dismissal had been carried out alleging disciplinary reasons. The most curious thing about the story is that, being the same case, it went through three legal classifications until it was resolved: disciplinary dismissalinadmissible and, finally, void. A complete circle. A fatal heart attack and an admission to the ICU. As detailed in the sentence From the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia, which has ultimately decided the case, the employee had started working as a laborer in a carpentry shop full-time in August 2021 and his gross monthly salary was 1,730.53 euros. After suffering the heart attack on March 23, 2022, the company notified him of the disciplinary dismissal on March 25, 2022, without assessing his medical condition or hospitalization in the ICU. The company claimed disciplinary dismissal arguing that the employee had not gone to work in the last two days. Obviously, the reason was more than justified given that the employee was still admitted to intensive care when he received the dismissal letter. Can you be fired during a hospital stay? Not currently, but before the 2022 labor reform that materialized with Law 15/2022, a disciplinary dismissal could be argued if it was not directly linked to the fact of hospitalization. In this case, the company did not fire him for being sickbut for not showing up at work. That nuance left the loophole that the company took advantage of to fire him when he had not yet recovered from his pathology or know if it would affect his work performance. The initial judicial process: unfair dismissal. The worker took the case to the Social Court number 1 of Girona. In the first instance, the judge analyzed the situation and decided that the dismissal was not disciplinary, but rather unfair. This means that the dismissal did not meet the legal requirements to be considered justified, and implied compensation. However, the court did not declare it void because, according to the previous legislation, the worker was not permanently disabled and had already been discharged when the sentence was issued, so the link with the heart attack could not be proven. Therefore, at that time, the court did not consider that there was discrimination on the basis of illness. It should be noted that, in July 2022, the latest labor reform came into force, which just changes this assessment regarding dismissals of people with illnesses or health conditions that can be considered disabilities, opening the door to new legal interpretations. A new twist: null dismissal. The worker appealed the first sentence and the case was raised to the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC). In October 2023, with the new labor law already fully established, the TSJC ruled that the dismissal should be considered void. The court indicated that the speed with which the company decided to fire the worker, even while he was in the ICU, showed that the company was aware of his irregular action in dismissal. This means that the dismissal was illegal and should be reversed in its entirety. The court insisted that the true cause of the dismissal was not absence from work (clearly justified), but rather the worker’s serious illness, which is why it was interpreted that direct discrimination on the grounds of health had been committed. The TSJC ordered the reinstatement of the worker in his position and that he be paid all back wages since the first lawsuit was filed. In addition, he ordered the company to pay compensation of 15,000 euros for moral damages to the worker. In Xataka | Fraud in medical leave: the “discharges” are increasing as companies try to combat absenteeism Image | Unsplash, Wikimedia Commons

Wimbledon has replaced all his line judges with a success. The only problem is that tennis players do not believe it

Wimbledon has replaced This year for the first time in its history to its line judges for a technology that is an evolution of the traditional eye of the hawk. Despite the accuracy it brings, several tennis players They have expressed their discontentespecially following the controversy with the party of Kartal and Pavlyuchenkova. What’s happening. Several tennis players have publicly expressed their doubts about the electronic system. Jack Draper and Emma Raducanu, the British numbers, have questioned the accuracy of decisions, while the Switzerland Belinda Bencic It was more direct: “I do not trust the system. Nor is it that I want to speak it too much, but it is really stressful.” The reluctance about this new system are increasingly common in tennis. Although the hawk’s eye has accompanied the games for many years already, The replacement of the judges It marks a general discontent in several professionals of this sport and fans. AND The case of Pavlyuchenkova He has put the situation more inri. Failure in three key situations. The incident that has been playing the most in networks was during the match between the British Sonay Kartal and the Russian Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova on the central track. With the marker matched 4-4, a Kartal ball clearly came out, but the Hawk-Eye system remained silent. Without the usual sound signal of “out”, the referee ordered to repeat the point, causing The frustration of Pavlyuchenkova: “You have stolen the game.” The ruling lasted 6 minutes and 49 seconds, during which the system lost three decisions. The AI ​​is working. The organization has revealed that the problem of Pavlyuchenkova was actually a human error: an operator accidentally deactivated part of the cameras with a click on their computer. Sally Bolton, executive director of All England Club, He has defended that “the ball monitoring system has worked optimally and effectively” throughout the tournament. After the incident, they have modified the software so that the cameras cannot be deactivated manually when there is an ongoing game. How the system works. The Live Electronic Line Calling (Live Elc) that Wimbledon uses is An evolution of the traditional hawk eye that we have been seeing since 2007. The key difference is that it now works in real time: use a network of cameras with artificial vision that tracks the ball and automatically emits an “out” when it goes out. Before, the hawk’s eye was only used to review decisions when players requested it; Now he is the main referee of all lines. It has been working for years. Studies show that electronic systems in sport are significantly more precise than human judges. An investigation He revealed that line referees make mistakes in 27% of cases where the check -up review is required, which is equivalent to an error every 17.4 games. The system has demonstrated its reliability in multiple sports for more than a decade, and both the Australian Open and the US Open have integrated it in its entirety in recent years. AI and arbitration, whenever complaints. Resistance to technology in arbitration is not exclusive to tennis. THE VAR IN FOOTBALL It generates constant controversies. In addition, Hawk-Eye is also implemented in volleyball, Cricket, and even in football for ghost goals, situations in which there has also been controversy with technology. And it is that sport is usually very reticating to technological changes. We don’t trust technology. Machines fail less than humans, but Perception is usually different. And it is that many problems attributed to AI are actually errors in the implementation or in human decisions that accompany the system, as has happened this time in Wimbledon. Technology is not infallible, but it is statistically more reliable than any available human alternative. And why don’t we trust? According to Gina Neff, a teacher in Cambridge, “right now, in many areas in which AI affects our lives, we believe that humans understand the context much better than machines,” he says. “The machine makes decisions based on the set of rules for which it has been programmed. But people are really good when it comes to multiple external values ​​and considerations as well – what is the right decision may not seem like the fair decision,” he continues. “It is the intersection between people and systems that we have to do well.” “We have to use the best of both to make the best decisions.” Cover image | Shep Mcallister In Xataka | 150 years ago the English played the first football matches in Spain. Now there is a fierce fight for finding out where

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.