1. Employees cannot claim the enjoyment of periods of paid leave when the events that cause them take place during their rest period
Judgment of the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 4 June 2020
The Court of Justice of the European Union has held that it is not contrary to European Union law for a collective bargaining agreement to establish that the enjoyment of periods of paid leave cannot be claimed when the events that caused them occurred during the employee’s rest period.
2. Marriage leave begins on the day of the ceremony except for when that is not a working day
Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court of 17 March 2020
The Supreme Court has established that the period of enjoyment of marriage leave starts counting from the day of the marriage itself when that occurs on a working day, whereas if it occurs on a non-working day, the calculation begins on the following working day.
3. A transfer of undertakings does not occur through the assumption of an essential part of the workforce when the contribution of specific materials is still needed to carry out the activity
Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court of 3 March 2020
The Supreme Court has held that a transfer of undertakings occurs as a result of the assumption of an essential part of a workforce when the activities are based on human labour; however, a transfer of undertakings does not occur when that labour is insufficient in itself to carry out the activity and the contribution of specific materials is needed.
4. When calculating the base salary for the purposes of compensation for dismissal of an expatriated employee, the amounts relating to the use of housing and health and accident insurance must be included
Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court of 21 February 2020
The Supreme Court has ruled that when calculating the base salary for the purposes of compensation for dismissal of an expatriated employee, the amounts paid by the company for the employee’s use of housing abroad and for the health and accident insurance policy taken out for them must be included, because these amounts do not compensate for any expenses deriving from the labour relationship but rather form part of the salary paid by the company in exchange for the labour carried out by the employee.
5. A detective’s report is not documentary evidence and is considered to have been unlawfully obtained iF it is obtained through coercion by the detective
Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court of 19 February 2020
The Supreme Court has held that a detective’s report submitted in trial is not documentary evidence, but rather testimonial evidence due to it containing third-party statements, and therefore it is not valid for the purposes of reviewing the proven facts in the appeal for reversal or the cassation appeal. In addition, the Supreme Court indicated that the evidence will be considered to have been unlawfully obtained in cases where it was obtained through coercion by the detective.
6. The reduction of variable remuneration due to certain periods of paid leave having been enjoyed is discriminatory on the basis of gender when it has a greater impact on women than men
Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Spanish National Court of 27 April 2020
The Spanish National Court has declared that the reduction of variable remuneration as a consequence of certain periods of paid leave having been enjoyed is discriminatory when this generally has a greater impact on women than on men. In addition, it indicated that the reduction of performance incentives as a consequence of the enjoyment of holidays is contrary to the law.
7. A collective dismissal is null when carried out without true negotiations with the employees’ representatives, and when carried out with bad faith, abuse of law, coercion or abuse of rights
Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Spanish National Court of 17 April 2020
The Spanish National Court has indicated that a collective dismissal carried out without true negotiations with the employees’ representatives, without the presentation of the necessary documentation and without formal communication of the business’ decision is null. Furthermore, a collective dismissal carried out with bad faith, abuse of law, coercion or abuse of rights by the company is also null.
|
