Workers at Camp Nou construction sites condemn labour exploitation
Last September, the Generalitat of Catalonia identified signs of labour fraud within one of the subcontractors involved in the Camp Nou project. Reports from El Periódico de Catalunya, part of the Prensa Ibérica group, indicated that one worker allegedly impersonated another and operated at the stadium under a real employment contract. Among nearly twenty colleagues under scrutiny, inspectors are monitoring whether the payroll aligns with the collective agreement and whether wages meet the stipulated minimums.
Inspecció is continuing its investigations and preparing sanctions against Pak Reforma Y Obra SL, a subcontractor connected to the stadium demolition work that was previously overseen by Limak Construction Europe SL, the main contractor appointed by Football Club Barcelona to renovate Camp Nou. Limak was confronted with questions from the media; they initially denied that the labour authority had found improprieties, then acknowledged the incident with the sub and claimed that the suppliers involved did not directly cooperate with Limak, which halted its activities on the project in September. The company maintains that inspectors detected irregularities and actions were paused in response, stressing that Limak enforces a strong and timely approach to compliance within its operations.
Identity impersonation — when a worker uses another person’s documents to gain access and work at a site — is an administrative offence with financial penalties. A surprise inspection in September uncovered such a violation by an employee of Pak Reforma y Obra SL. The investigation is ongoing, and there may be additional irregularities still to be disclosed. (Source: El Periódico de Catalunya, with corroboration from Labour Inspectorate reports.)
Construction workers at Camp Nou condemn “labour exploitation”
Construction is an industry where some firms resort to unlawful practices to cut costs and gain a competitive edge. Andreu Ogayar, head of the construction section at CCOO de Catalunya, notes that subcontractor firms vary widely, yet a significant number struggle to comply with the collective agreement. This creates a systemic problem for the sector, he says.
Juani Arenas, who leads construction work for Catalonia at UGT, observes that the industry has modernized. Control and compliance are more robust in large, solvent companies with visible union representation. Where representation is lacking, minimum labour standards and risk prevention are frequently not met.
Necho Parra, a lawyer with Col·lectiu Ronda, lists several violations: non-payment of the agreed salary, misclassification of professional categories, and frequent non-compliance with overtime. He adds that such violations are common in subcontracting chains across construction.
Ogayar explains that the owners of suspicious firms often own multiple companies, operating them under different names and managers until the fines accumulate, leading to bankruptcy or reformation under a new entity. This cycle allows some operators to survive despite repeated penalties.
Repeated fraud
Identity theft fraud targets individuals who act as the criminals in specific sectors. In the logistics and home delivery realm, couriers who rent accounts are a known issue. Large platforms have faced such abuses, with some workers paying a share of profits to the account holders while continuing to work under undocumented conditions.
A long-time Pakistan-born worker describes a scenario in which a colleague, also lacking proper residence or work authorization in Spain, managed to work on sites by using someone else’s documents. The contract appears in the impersonator’s name, and the legitimate-sounding salary is paid month by month, with social security contributions made. The actual worker remains in another country, yet receives the payroll via a local bank account. He notes that the account holder may be unaware of the true arrangement, while others notice the irregularities only when they observe unfamiliar faces at the site.
The worker cooked up a scenario where the person performing the job is effectively distant and disconnected from the daily realities on site. In many cases, the so-called “document rent” arrangement means the real beneficiary receives payment while the authorised worker, who bears the risk, remains unable to access banking or legal protections. This situation underscores a broader pattern where malfeasance goes unchecked, and the problem persists unless there is structural oversight.