SPAIN Trends and Developments Contributed by: Jacobo Martínez, Juan Alonso and Luis Aguilar Romera, Eversheds Sutherland Spain
The Court ruled in favour of the company, holding that it does not constitute a violation of trade union freedom for a company to request general justifica - tion regarding the use of union leave time, such as attendance at meetings, training activities or trade union congresses, and to withhold payment for hours that are not reasonably justified. The Court confirmed that companies may require employee representatives or trade unions to indicate the general purpose of the leave (eg, meetings, train - ing or union visits), without needing to disclose spe - cific details. While unions retain discretion over the content of their activities, they must provide enough information to justify the use of paid leave. This decision clarifies that employers may exercise control over union leave usage without infringing union rights, provided their requests remain within reasonable and general limits. Remote working agreements and invalid clauses In its judgment of 26 June 2024, the Spanish Supreme Court assessed several standard clauses in remote working agreements and declared some of them null for contravening key labour law principles. The Court emphasised that employers cannot retain a unilateral right to modify essential working conditions, espe - cially when clauses are ambiguously worded or based solely on business needs. The Court invalidated the following clauses: • A clause granting the line manager the authority to determine the working time schedule remotely based on the Company’s needs – The Supreme Court states that, since it leaves the decision solely to one of the parties to the agreement, the man - ager or the company cannot unilaterally change the percentage of on-site work entirely or the working time schedule. • A clause on technical issues or incidents prevent - ing remote work – The period during which remote employees cannot perform their duties due to IT breakdowns or similar incidents cannot be consid - ered as resting time because the employee cannot work because of issues that are the responsibility of the company, and they do not have the oppor -
tunity to leave the work environment or freely use that time for leisure. Therefore, this time must be considered as working time. If services cannot be provided for reasons that are not attributable to the employee, he or she does not lose their right to remuneration. • A clause on the percentage of and distribution between on-site and remote work – This duty must be fulfilled concretely: generic wording is not acceptable. The Supreme Court explains that the contract must specify in a clear and precise way the percentage and distribution of on-site and remote work specifying each one of them. In a follow-up ruling in April 2025, the Court reaf - firmed that the right to have expenses reimbursed is directly enforceable under the Remote Work Law (LTD), regardless of whether a collective agreement has detailed the procedure. While collective bargain - ing may regulate specifics, it cannot eliminate the right itself, which is granted by statute. Finally, the Court invalidated clauses that restrict an employee’s ability to return to on-site work or exclude compensation if the company unilaterally revokes the remote arrangement. These were deemed incompat - ible with the LTD, as they unjustifiably waive rights and breach the principle of reciprocity. Pay transparency register In its judgment of 21 November 2024, the Supreme Court clarified that Article 28.2 of the Workers’ Statute does not impose an obligation to include individually identifiable salary data in the pay register. The Court ruled in favour of the company, stating that “there is no legal provision that clearly requires” such disclosure. Furthermore, the Court added that any such obliga - tion must stem from explicit legislation and be subject to appropriate data protection safeguards under the EU’s GDPR and Spain’s national data protection and privacy legislation (LOPDGDD). Travel time to clients and effective working time The Spanish Supreme Court, in a ruling from 27 November 2024 has once again addressed the issue
614 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook