1. Self-incorporated individuals are not entitled to a full active retirement (jubilación activa) pension when the company hires the workers
The concept of a self-incorporated individual (autónomo societario) cannot, for the purposes of receiving a full retirement pension, be assimilated to that of an “ordinary” self-employed worker when the company and not the natural person hires the workers. The law’s specific aim of avoiding employment contracts being terminated as a result of the natural-person employer’s retirement would not be fulfilled.
2. The anti-fraud rule’s thresholds for qualifying as a collective dismissal are calculated in rolling blocks of 90 days
The Supreme Court has clarified that the 90-day periods in the anti-fraud rule provided in article 51.1 of the Statute of Workers are consecutive. If there are no dismissals within a 90-day period, the chain of consecutive blocks of 90 days is broken, thus meaning that the rule on collective dismissals is not triggered.
3. Employees should be informed that a video-surveillance system is in place but not necessarily about its specific purpose
The Supreme Court has endorsed video-surveillance evidence brought to a disciplinary dismissal that showed an employee breaching their obligations towards the company. The Supreme Court concluded that employees should be informed about the existence of a video-surveillance system, but not necessarily about what the images will be used for. The court also deemed immaterial that the trade fair park where the employee was working and not the employer company had installed the cameras.
4. Workers not reinstated at the end of their voluntary leave are entitled to unemployment-benefits just like any other unfairly dismissed worker
The Supreme Court has held that an employee who is not reinstated after a voluntary leave of absence and whose dismissal the company recognises as unfair is legally unemployed for unemployment-benefit purposes. The court stated that the company’s refusal to reinstate the worker should not be detrimental to her as the contract termination had been recognised as unfair.
5. Auditing trade-union delegates’ computers during a union election campaign is not a violation of the right to freedom of association
The right to freedom of association was not considered violated in a case in which the company deprived trade-union delegates of access to their computers during the union’s election campaign in order to carry out a computer audit. The union was able to carry out its trade-union functions because it had premises with sufficient technological resources at its disposal and it was not proven that those computers contained trade-union information that they actually needed for the campaign.
6. An agreement to preserve the working conditions of a public entity’s employees in the event of subrogation is not valid if an employee’s contract is novated
The Supreme Court has held that an agreement to preserve the working conditions of a public entity’s employee in the event of subrogation is not valid if, after the subrogation, the contract is novated from a temporary contract to a permanent one after the employee has gone through a recruitment process.
7. A weekly workstation-allocation system is not a substantial modification of working conditions
The National Court has held that implementing a system of weekly allocation of workstations through an electronic platform is not a substantial modification of working conditions, as it is a valid method of organising workplaces based on how many staff members are present.
8. A company went too far by exceeding the legal requirements regarding working-time registration
The National Court has held that a company exceeded the provisions of the Statute of Workers and the applicable collective bargaining agreement by implementing a series of measures relating to recording working time that were not agreed contractually or established in the applicable collective bargaining agreement.
|
