1. THE EXISTENCE OF A “GROUP OF COMPANIES FOR EMPLOYMENT PURPOSES” DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES OF JURISDICTION APPLICABLE TO COLLECTIVE REDUNDANCIES IN THE CONTEXT OF INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS
The Supreme Court held that the Labour Chamber of the High Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction to hear first instance legal actions relating to collective redundancies in which the employer is facing insolvency proceedings. This is in spite of the fact that the lawsuit submitted by the claimant was directed against other companies or natural persons based on the belief that the companies operated as a group for employment purposes.
2. FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE SELECTION CRITERIA AGREED IN THE FRAMEWORK OF A COLLECTIVE REDUNDANCY INVOLVES THE DECLARATION OF UNFAIRNESS (NOT THE NULLITY) OF THE RESULTANT INDIVIDUAL DISMISSAL
The Supreme Court declared that the failure to observe the selection criteria agreed in the consultation period of a collective redundancy will not lead to the nullity of the resultant individual redundancy but to it being declared “unfair”.
3. COLLECTIVE REDUNDANCY REGULATIONS DO NOT APPLY IN THE EVENT OF THE CLOSURE OF A WORKPLACE IF IT AFFECTS FEWER THAN TWENTY EMPLOYEES
The Supreme Court held that it is not possible to extrapolate EU case-law on collective redundancies to all cases involving the closure of a workplace.
4. SEVERANCE PAYMENT: SHOULD IT INCLUDE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR MEDICAL AND LIFE INSURANCE OR RETIREMENT SCHEMES?
The Supreme Court has ruled that severance payment calculations must include premiums or contributions paid by the company relating to medical insurance, life insurance and retirement schemes.
5. DISMISSAL OF AN EMPLOYEE WHO WAS TEMPORARILY DISABLED DECLARED UNFAIR
The High Court of Justice of Catalonia upheld the appeal against the judgment of Labour Court 33 of Barcelona dated 23 December 2016 and held the dismissal of an employee who was temporarily disabled to be “unfair” (rather than void) on the grounds that the employee’s situation was reversible. Therefore, it did not come under the EU’s definition of disability.
|
