Alejandro Llano, lawyer: “There is a type of dismissal that does not appear in the law but is the most popular: dismissal in July”

Every year the same thing happens. July moves inexorably towards a well-deserved summer vacation, the offices and work centers are emptying little by little and, just then, the letters that no employee wants to receive begin to arrive: the dismissal letter. Alejandro Llanomanager of the legal office of UGT Catalonia, denounces a type of dismissal that is not officially recognized in the Workers’ Statute, but is well known to those who must defend the rights of workers: “There is a type of dismissal that does not appear in the law but is the most popular: the dismissal in July. In the last fortnight it is incredible.” The deadline runs even if you are not there. The key to Llano’s complaint lies in a detail that may go unnoticed, but is decisive in challenging a dismissal. He article 59.3 of the Workers’ Statute establishes that there is a period of 20 business days to challenge a dismissal in Spain. That is, Saturdays, Sundays and holidays do not count. On the other hand, the article 183 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary declares August as a non-working month for “all judicial actions, except those that are declared urgent by procedural laws. However, the General Council of the Judiciary, through regulations, may enable them for the purposes of other actions.” One of the cases in which the month of August is enabled as a business month is, according to article 43.2. of the Social Jurisdiction Lawthe dismissal of workers. That’s the trick. The Law Regulating Social Jurisdiction declares August a non-working month for almost everything, but makes an exception for layoffs, as it is an urgent procedure, generating confusion among laid-off workers, who may miss the deadline to challenge their dismissal thinking that justice “is closed for vacation.” “The rule, wanting to benefit the worker, is harming them, declaring August a business day for layoffs,” laments Llano. A dismissal notified on July 20 begins to expire while half the country is on the beach. When there is no lawyer available. Furthermore, moving the challenge of the dismissal to August has another perverse cost for employees: finding someone to defend you in time. “In August it is difficult to find a lawyer. Many offices are closed, because lawyers also take vacations,” highlights Llano. The specialized office Bermejo i Alegret, confirm the same phenomenon of increased layoffs in July from another trench. In his case, he speaks of a “silent practice with high legal costs” and warns of an aggravating circumstance in which the company knows that the worker is on vacation and even outside the country to begin the dismissal process. In these cases, the lawyer assures that “the courts can interpret this conduct as an indication of imbalance in the relationship” and point out the violation of your right of defense, tipping the balance towards the recognition of an unfair or even void dismissal. A phenomenon that statistics do not see. Here another paradox arises that, in part, explains why this continues to happen. Despite what Llano and other labor lawyers denounce from their daily experience, there is no official data that reveals how many ordinary layoffs occur during the month of July. The Ministry of Labor only measures collective dismissals on a monthly basis through its Employment Regulation Statisticswhich in July 2025 counted 4,864 laid-off workers, compared to 3,898 layoffs June or the 992 of September of that same year. These layoffs only tell part of the story, collective layoffs are growing, yes, but they only tell part of the story since they represent a percentage of total layoffs. The bulk of layoffs, individual and objective, are counted annually in the Dismissal Statistics and their Costwhich totaled 643,681 layoffs in the latest records of 2024, without the possibility of breaking them down month by month. The General Council of the Judiciary also does not monthly list the figures for dismissal claimsand only provides the quarterly and annual data. Therefore, we are faced with a phenomenon that, although labor lawyers see it repeated every summer, remains invisible to official statistics. In Xataka | Requesting a leave of absence from work has a catch: if you do not notify your return in time, you can lose your job forever. Image | Wikimedia Commons (Cberbell)

less when the lawyer is an AI

Many Lawyers are turning to AI to write their writings and arguments, sometimes with quite disastrous results; from Penalties for including false quotes to trials canceled. Today we receive another piece of news that relates the legal profession to AI, but in a completely different way. The AI ​​wins its first trial. They tell it in Guardian. An HR consultancy has won the trial in which it claimed non-payment to a client. So far everything is normal, the extraordinary thing is that the legal services have been provided by an AI law firm. An artificial intelligence prepared the case, managed the documentation and finally hired a lawyer to attend the oral hearing. Garfield AI. It is the company that is the protagonist of this case. According to their own websiteare “the first law firm in the world authorized and regulated to provide legal services entirely through artificial intelligence.” The company is authorized by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the body that deals with regulatory matters related to solicitors in the United Kingdom, and specializes in claims of up to £10,000. AI prepares, a human executes. As we said, the AI’s job in this case was to prepare all the prior documentation necessary for the trial. The system drafted the initial letter, prepared the statements of four witnesses and compiled the dossier for the trial that took place in Wandsworth County on May 14. However, since an AI cannot attend a trial, it is necessary for a human lawyer to attend the hearing. Dominic Li was chosen for the task and stated that the AI ​​presented the case “clearly and effectively.” Affordable. The result of the trial was that payment of the debt, which amounted to 7,000 pounds, had to be made. The cost of the process was £400, something that paying a normal law firm would have been much more expensive. According to Philip Young, the co-founder of Garfield AI, many claims are usually not filed precisely because the expense of going to trial exceeds the amount claimed. Tools of this type can democratize access to legal advice for these types of cases. Advocacy. The legal profession threw itself into the arms of AI long before ChatGPT was on everyone’s lips and there is plenty of news about the use of AI tools in legal processes. However, usually the stories are more along the lines of lawyers not checking the AI’s answers and they end up citing invented jurisprudence as happened in Galicia. In the Canary Islands there was also a lawyer sanctioned to cite no less than 48 false sentences. Image | Xataka with Magnific In Xataka | The trial against Sam Altman seemed like a duel between two millionaires. It has ended up uncovering the ins and outs of OpenAI

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.