Employment - Legislative and case law developments

1. Directive (EU) 2025/2450 strengthens the information and consultation rights of European works councils in transnational matters

Directive (EU) 2025/2450, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2025, amending Directive 2009/38/EC as regards the establishment and operation of European works councils and the effective enforcement of transnational information and consultation rights, sets out more detailed rules on those rights. It clarifies when an issue is considered transnational and requires Member States to adopt effective, proportionate and dissuasive measures to ensure compliance, including financial penalties.

2. Law 9/2025 of 3 December on sustainable mobility introduces new employment obligations for companies

From 5 December 2027, companies with workplaces employing more than 200 workers (or 100 workers per shift) must have a sustainable mobility-to-work plan in place, including measures to promote environmentally friendly mobility. In workplaces with more than 1,000 workers in metropolitan areas with more than 500,000 inhabitants, measures must be taken to reduce mobility during peak hours and throughout the working day. The Workers’ Statute has also been amended to require that collective bargaining agreements include provisions on negotiating these measures.

3. The dismissal of a worker who used her colleagues’ payslips in court to prove that she suffered gender-based pay discrimination cannot be upheld

The European Court of Human Rights has held that Spain violated the Convention by upholding the dismissal of a worker who used colleagues’ payslips in court to prove that she was suffering pay discrimination on the grounds of gender. The ECtHR found that the domestic courts should have considered the context of the discrimination against her when assessing the severity of her conduct.

4. The most recent location should be taken into account for determining the applicable law when the worker’s habitual place of work changes

In the absence of a choice by the parties, to determine the law applicable to the employment contract when the worker begins to perform his or her habitual work in a different country from the initial one, it is the link between the employment relationship and the last habitual place of work that should be considered.

5. The Supreme Court rules that terminating an employee after 545 days of sick leave does not constitute dismissal

The termination of an employee’s contract after exhausting 545 days of sick leave does not constitute tacit dismissal. The company’s action is linked to an administrative obligation that does not demonstrate real, unequivocal intent to terminate the claimant’s employment contract via dismissal.

6. The five-day leave for the hospitalisation of a family member must be calculated in working days

As the five-day-leave entitlement for a family member’s hospitalisation must be counted as working days, a collective bargaining agreement that establishes that it must be taken in calendar days would be less favourable than the statutory regulation. It therefore cannot prevent a worker from taking five working days of leave.

7. Permanent changes to working hours cannot be communicated with 24 hours’ notice, even if permitted by the collective bargaining agreement

Any article in a collective bargaining agreement providing for 24 hours’ notice to communicate changes in working hours due to service requirements is void. This notice period is unreasonably short, even when there may be unforeseen circumstances that make it necessary to change shifts, and particularly if those changes are permanent.

8. Financial difficulties do not exempt companies from the obligation to make contributions to the Spanish Public Treasury in the event of collective redundancies

The Supreme Court holds that if a company meets the legal requirements for the obligation to make contributions to the Treasury in cases of collective redundancies affecting workers aged 50, financial difficulties or risk to the viability of the business do not exempt it from that obligation.