Dismissal in Spain: The decision on the merits in UGT v. Spain, Complaint No. 207/2022, is now public

The decision of the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) on the merits in Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT) v. Spain, Complaint No. 207/2022, became public on 29 July 2024.

In its complaint, UGT alleged the situation in Spain constitutes a violation of Article 24 (the right to protection in cases of termination of employment) of the Revised European Social Charter (“the Charter”) on the grounds that the mechanism for compensation in cases of termination of employment without a valid reason provided for in national law and as interpreted in domestic case law, does not allow victims of dismissals without a valid reason to obtain a compensation which would be adequate to cover the damage suffered and have a dissuasive effect for employers. In particular, the worker is only entitled to compensation automatically by law that sets a maximum ceiling and does not take into account the actual damage suffered.

In its decision on the merits, the ECSR concluded by 13 votes against 1 that there is a violation of Article 24.b of the Charter.

Dismissal (Spanish Workers Startute): Decision on the merits in UGT v. Spain Complaint

The Committee takes note of the measures aimed at discouraging employers from making unfair dismissal decisions.

The Committee notes that the ceiling of compensation that the worker can receive in cases of unfair dismissal, applicable to workers hired before the 2012 reform, is higher than the one in the other cases examined by the Committee (42 months before the reform in comparison to 24 and 20 months in cases of Finland and France respectively and 12, 24 or 36 months in Italy). However, the ceilings applicable to workers hired after the 2012 reform, notably 24 months, are very similar to those of the Finnish, French and Italian systems already examined by the Committee (see §71 above).

The Committee welcomes recent developments in the Spanish case law where a right to possible additional compensation has been acknowledged in case of unfair dismissal. The Committee also notes that there have been several decisions of the domestic courts which carried out “conventionality control” and assessed the compatibility of the compensation scale with international treaties.

However, it appears that the additional compensation was only awarded in one case and it seems that the practice has not been widely followed by other domestic courts. Moreover, the Government itself acknowledges that additional compensation in case of unfair dismissal is possible only in exceptional cases according to domestic case law, thus it would not apply in all cases of unfair dismissals.

The Committee considers that the ceilings set by the Spanish legislation are not sufficiently high to make good the damage suffered by the victim in all cases and to be dissuasive for the employer.

The real damage suffered by the worker concerned linked to the specific characteristics of the case may not be appropriately taken into account, not least because the possibility of additional compensation is very limited.

The Committee therefore considers that in light of all of the above elements the right to adequate compensation or other appropriate relief within the meaning of Article 24.b of the Charter is not adequately guaranteed

In conclusion, the Committee therefore holds that there is a violation of Article 24.b of the Charter.