Employment - Legislative and case law developments

1. Subrogation obligation not affected by a collective redundancy carried out before the change of contractor

The Supreme Court has clarified that a new contractor’s obligation to step into the former contractor’s position (subrogation) is not affected by the fact that the latter carried out a collective redundancy after not being awarded the contract.

2. Applicable collective agreement covers workers on fraudulent temporary contracts, even if expressly excluded from its scope

Temporary workers cannot be excluded from the scope of the applicable collective agreement for not meeting specific length-of-service requirements if their contracts are fraudulent.

3. Limiting how much female footballers receive from the “end-of-career fund” not a violation of fundamental rights

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Spanish Footballers’ Association’s decision to limit the allowance its members receive from the “end-of-career fund” does not violate fundamental rights as the allowance is paid from the association’s own resources.

4. Remote voting in trade union elections not valid

The Supreme Court has confirmed that remote voting in trade union elections is not valid. As article 75 of the Statute of Workers only provides for voting in person or by post, no other voting system is allowed.

5. Individual telework agreements not required during the Covid pandemic

The Supreme Court held in this case that the company was not obliged to sign individual telework agreements with its employees during the Covid pandemic, as it had provided them with sufficient means to be able to work remotely.

6. Prior sectoral agreement takes precedence over contractor company collective agreement

In addition to establishing that a company collective agreement takes precedence over a sectoral collective agreement, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is possible to determine which collective agreement applies to a collective dismissal procedure.

7. Company requirement to prove cohabitation or effective care for statutory paid leave ruled null

In relation to the paid leave provided in article 37.3.b) of the Statute of Workers, the National High Court has ruled that a company may not impose additional requirements – such as proof that the worker lives with the person who needs care and that such care is actually provided – beyond proof of the applicable family ties and causal event set out in that provision.