Post by nijhumnishita033 on Jan 10, 2024 3:32:03 GMT -8
Using the repeated interim contract in the case of vacations , which caused the irregularity of the initial contract to determine that the employment relationship was indefinite and, therefore, hence, the unfair dismissal. Supreme Court: the hiring was fraudulent Once the contradiction between the aforementioned sentences compared here and required by art. 219 of Law 36/2011, of October 10, regulating social jurisdiction , the Social Chamber of the TS affirms that absence due to vacation is not a situation of suspension of the employment contract with the right to reserve a place , but rather a mere ordinary interruption of the provision of services that does not generate a reserved vacancy itself.
Facade of the Supreme Court. (Photo: Eficiencia) That said, the Fourth Chamber points out that, in the case at hand, the company is “ fully aware ” that the staff it has “enjoy vacations and breaks with the regularity typical of such situations ” and, therefore, “ The response to what could be a habitual volume of activity must consider the hours of effective provision.” Consequently, the Phone Number Data fact that staff workers exercise their rights to rest and vacation “is a fully foreseeable circumstance and, consequently, the temporary coverage of their functions by resorting to the interim route is not, therefore, in accordance with the law. by substitution”, declares our High Court. The interim contract is due to the extraordinary circumstance that the company's staff may incur when a cause for suspension of the contract occurs.
“Such absences from work occur within the normal development of the employment contract and are part of the organizational forecast that the employer must carry out, moving away from the exceptionality that the temporary contract comes to solve,” adds the recent ruling. In short, according to the opinion of the Social Chamber, there is nothing extraordinary about the staff enjoying their vacation periods. Thus, given the " systematic use " by the company of the interim tool, the Supreme Court ends up considering the appeal for the unification of doctrine and declaring that the termination of the contract constituted a dismissal that, being exempt of cause, it must be classified as inadmissible with the legal consequences corresponding to said classification in art. 56 of the ET.
Facade of the Supreme Court. (Photo: Eficiencia) That said, the Fourth Chamber points out that, in the case at hand, the company is “ fully aware ” that the staff it has “enjoy vacations and breaks with the regularity typical of such situations ” and, therefore, “ The response to what could be a habitual volume of activity must consider the hours of effective provision.” Consequently, the Phone Number Data fact that staff workers exercise their rights to rest and vacation “is a fully foreseeable circumstance and, consequently, the temporary coverage of their functions by resorting to the interim route is not, therefore, in accordance with the law. by substitution”, declares our High Court. The interim contract is due to the extraordinary circumstance that the company's staff may incur when a cause for suspension of the contract occurs.
“Such absences from work occur within the normal development of the employment contract and are part of the organizational forecast that the employer must carry out, moving away from the exceptionality that the temporary contract comes to solve,” adds the recent ruling. In short, according to the opinion of the Social Chamber, there is nothing extraordinary about the staff enjoying their vacation periods. Thus, given the " systematic use " by the company of the interim tool, the Supreme Court ends up considering the appeal for the unification of doctrine and declaring that the termination of the contract constituted a dismissal that, being exempt of cause, it must be classified as inadmissible with the legal consequences corresponding to said classification in art. 56 of the ET.