The Supreme Court establishes that corporations should enable the worker to refute the accusation within the occasion of a disciplinary dismissal | Economy | EUROtoday

The Supreme Court establishes that corporations can not disciplinaryly dismiss a employee with out opening a previous listening to course of. Thus, earlier than dismissal, the worker has the appropriate to defend himself in opposition to the costs or accusations on which the termination relies. “A worker’s employment relationship must not be terminated for reasons related to his conduct or performance before he has been offered the opportunity to defend himself against the charges leveled against him,” the courtroom guidelines.

In a ruling dated November 13, the total Social Chamber of the excessive courtroom has unanimously upheld an attraction by the Fundació per als estudis Superiors de Música i arts Esceniques de les Illes Balears (FERMAE-IB) in opposition to a ruling of February 2023 of the Superior Court of Justice of that autonomous neighborhood.

As defined by the Supreme Court in a press launch, this choice relies on “the need to directly apply article 7 of Convention number 158 of the International Labor Organization (ILO) of 1982, in force in Spain since 1986. This article states: “A worker’s employment relationship shall not be terminated for reasons related to his conduct or performance before he has been given the opportunity to defend himself against the charges against him, unless he is unable to do so. The employer may reasonably be asked to grant this possibility.

Before proceeding with the dismissal, the magistrates say, the worker must be able to defend himself against the irregularities attributed to him. With this movement the Supreme Court modifies its own doctrine, established in the eighties, which is justified by “the changes that have occurred in our system during all this time.” Among them he mentions the regulation of International Treaties, constitutional doctrine, qualification of dismissal or the inapplicability of essentially the most favorable norm globally.

This change within the Supreme Court’s doctrine is “very important,” within the opinion of Ana Gómez, president of the National Association of Labor Workers, as a result of it establishes a single criterion relating to the necessity for a listening to previous to a disciplinary dismissal. “Until now,” he explains, “we saw many doubts about the need to hold a prior hearing; There were courts that indicated the unfairness of the dismissal if there was none, others told you that it was not a requirement… Now we know that it is an essential step, for the worker to be able to argue. There is no longer a possible interpretation, this gives us more legal certainty.”