tiredness and vacation
The ongoing negotiations between justice authorities and union leaders did not yield a resolution after the ministry’s post-election outreach. A committee vote resulted in a decision to suspend talks indefinitely while maintaining the schedule for planned demonstrations in the coming weeks, including actions on the 11th and 20th of July during the election campaign year marked as 23-J.
Union representatives argue that the summer holidays, with their predictable dip in activity, have slowed the momentum of the strikes. Yet they remain confident in continuing the mobilizations already planned: a sit-in at the Supreme Court of Justice on the 7th, a gathering with staff from across Spain at Moncloa on the 11th, and a coordinated protest to align with the EU Justice summit scheduled to take place in Logroño on the 20th of the same month. Strikes are planned for both days, underscoring a steadfast resolve despite seasonal fatigue.
The strike committee has signaled that the new government resulting from the elections will face a clear dispute to resolve. The leadership has pressed for accountability from the Government Delegations and described their monitoring of the ruling party’s election campaign as a critical issue. Critics within the union circles have labeled the Department of Justice as “rotten” and accused those in charge of showing cowardice in their stance, arguing that the ministry preaches openness to others while resisting changes internally.
A joint statement from the unions contends that Justice officials do not listen, noting that mediation proposals offered five days prior were rejected. They claim the ministry did not respect workers’ and union rights, accusing it of imposing its own criteria that contradicts fundamental rights and undervalues public servants. The unions insist that the right to collective bargaining should be upheld and that the administration must engage in good faith negotiations with relevant labor representatives.
From the unions’ perspective, workers’ representatives allege that the Executive has received substantial funds for justice reform programs while failing to meet obligations related to information, participation, and collective bargaining within European Union frameworks. They point to criticism aimed at the Justice Commissioner as part of broader tensions between the judiciary and the executive branch. The appeals made by the unions have resonated with public sentiment, they say, and although current legal provisions restrict some duties to the Ministry of Justice’s judges and lawyers, they remain hopeful that necessary duties will be recognized and fulfilled in due course. They attribute the perceived delay in pay adjustments to calendar-related obstacles and the electoral process, which they view as a complicating factor.
The summer period has brought a natural slowdown in vigilance during the indefinite strike, attributed to the need for rest and to the challenges of balancing work with family life. Economic strain is another factor, as extended mobilization places a heavy burden on households. Still, union leaders emphasize that the current pause is temporary and not a full suspension of their campaign. They insist that the profession remains committed to the cause on behalf of lawyers, judges, and prosecutors who have fought for the pay increase and for whom strikes were once a necessary step.
Looking ahead, the unions call for postponement of direct actions until new courts are established and a new government is formed, along with other responsible authorities. The message is clear: the conflict continues, the mobilization persists, and the interruption should be understood as a strategic pause rather than a final halt. The wider aim remains to secure fair compensation and satisfactory working conditions for the justice sector workforce, including those in legal and judicial roles who have stood at the forefront of the campaign for better pay and rights.