The company Duro Felguera, an important energy sector company in the Asturian business fabric, reached an agreement with unions in November 2022 on the mass dismissal of its 180 workers, but only six out of eleven union representatives supported the agreement. Representatives of one of the factories rejected the agreement. Left Unity Movement, ERE appealed to the High Court of Justice of Asturias and then to the Supreme Court, It confirms that the agreement had an economic reason and was negotiated “in good faith.”
Decision on the presentation of the Social Chamber of the Supreme Court Judge Juan Molins This document, available to EL PERIÓDICO DE ESPAÑA of the Prensa Ibérica group, confirms what the Supreme Court of Justice of Asturias said in March last year against the union’s claims.
Unity Current Representatives They refused to sign the agreement They demanded a restructuring in which there would be no layoffs and other options such as early retirement could be used. They also said they were hired. new staff for the most important job, Moreover, there was no feasibility plan to handle the workload when layoffs occurred.
For this reason, they requested the Supreme Court to declare the invalidity of the ERE and to declare the rights of the workers to return to their jobs with compensation for the damage they have suffered up to that point. The appeal was rejected and this decision has now been upheld by the Supreme Court.
business collapse
The sentence contains specific data about the situation of the group. So the net amount turnover decreased, Continuously from 2014 until December 31, 2021, 90.9% of the time In the same period, personnel expenses decreased and general operating expenses decreased by 88.4%. Net worth has been negative since 2020
Social Room on this subject It was investigated whether there was intimidation or not or abuse of rights under that contract; whether the group of companies negotiated in good faith; you have provided the required documents; If it is proven that there is a combination of economic, organizational and productive reasons justifying collective dismissal; whether the criteria for assigning workers comply with the law; and whether the conglomerate used coercion as a method of oppression.
In its allegations, Corriente Sindical pointed out that intimidation occurred, claiming that the group of companies used coercion as a method of pressure during negotiations with the unions. The agreement determined that 98 of the 180 people affected would correspond to the parent company; 71 will be given to DFMOM and 11 to Mompresa, and the company will also pay for 40 jobs abroad. In the plaintiffs’ opinion, impacting all workers in society It is discriminating against other workers in order to get that representative’s vote at the last minute.
A couple was rescued
It also states that a decision of the Labor Inspector determines that: Two spouses will not be included in the business regulation file, keeping one of them in the company anyway. His wife, both over 60, was also included in the file, according to Corriente Sincidal, secretary of the committee that signed the agreement. thus ensuring that both compensations are received ameliorated by dismissal at the doorstep of retirement.
The Supreme Court responded that the factual statement regarding the decision of the Supreme Court of Asturas did not contain any factual statements that would allow it to be proven why one of the workers’ representatives voted in favor of the agreement. Termination of five jobs at Felguera IHI SA.
Actually, no credibility was attributed to the witness It was suggested by the plaintiff who testified on this matter. It is also not proven that this representative of the works council was promoted immediately after signing the contract. Finally, there is no evidence that the committee’s secretary and his wife received any preferential treatment.
The Supreme Court did not decide that there was no will to negotiate. of the company. “On the contrary, a broad negotiation process developed between the company and the majority of the workers’ legal representatives, which resulted in an agreement,” reads the decision, which was available to this newspaper.
The Supreme Court emphasizes that proven facts establish that the company provides the necessary documentation to justify the reality of its business situation; “This allowed for an agreement to be reached that allowed for a reduction in the number of workers whose contracts were terminated, which hinders forecasting” for this reason.”
Regarding the economic situation of Duro Felguera, the Supreme Court concludes that the group of companies has negative operating results, with a significant decrease in turnover and negative pre-tax results, regardless of revenue. “In conclusion, Its equity has been negative since 2020 “And there is a serious liquidity risk,” he said.
This suggests that, among other reasons, it is accompanied by an unfavorable economic situation. template cost, That is why the group of companies made personnel adjustments,” he adds. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded in this case: “There are economic reasons that justify the group’s agreement with the majority of workers’ representatives On November 9, 2022″.