The government and the Ministry of Equality have considered as resolved the error in the parity law which made it easier to dismiss anyone who requested an adaptation of the working day to reconcile or a five-day leave to care for a sick family member, but have doubts about its scope. They remain for the moment far from clear. Parliamentary sources suggest that the correction, already introduced in a rule being developed in Congresswill not be published in the BOE for at least two months. Some are even delaying the deadline until 2025. The main doubt that remains is whether it will be applied retroactively from August 22, the date on which the error came into effect.
The situation is at stake of all the layoffs that have taken place since then, reach out to people who have requested or already have a change in their schedule (including teleworking) to be able to reconcile, as well as those who have a few days off due to the health problems of a sick or dependent relative. The fact is that no one in the Executive, starting with the Minister of Equality, Ana Romero, said the recovery of the armor would be retroactiveThe argument is that these “victims” of layoffs would be protected by a favorable interpretation of labor jurisprudence.
But the lawyers themselves point out that this is not always the case and consider that the main proof that there is a problem is that the Ministry of Labor was forced to explicitly regulate in the Workers’ Statute the “objective nullity” of these dismissals, through a amendment introduced in a decree-law approved in June 2023but which was repealed a year later due to an “error” in the parity law. Without retroactivity, workers from August 22 until the correction comes into force, They would find themselves in a difficult situation.
In this sense, union activists warn that the longer it takes to clarify the situation, the more uncertainties will be faced by workers, but also by lawyers and judges. They remember that the introduction, a year ago, of the “shield” against dismissals just for requesting a change in working hours, had already caused an earthquake in the offices that deal with labor issues, surpassed only by that of its surprising repeal.
The question is clear: what will happen to the complaints filed or already being processed? Because cases continue to arise and, whatever the Government says, their protection is very different. Therefore, a retroactive change would require reviewing an indefinite number of processes already open.
Doubts in Congress
These doubts persist. The amendment incorporated this Tuesday in the presentation phase of the law on the efficiency of the public justice service system with the support of all parliamentary groups, rectifies the text of the joint law and corrects previous errors, which were not limited to dismissals due to the adaptation of the working day. It also recovers protection against dismissal for victims of sexual violence who “accidentally” repealed the trans law in 2023.
The text you had access to elEconomista.es, At no point is there any question of retroactivity. This is not necessary since this section is generally included in a final provision of the articles, which would require a second amendment. However, during the closed-door debate on the presentation, the necessary additional modification was not addressedaccording to parliamentary sources.
Nor was it discussed in the committee debate that took place subsequently (this time, with lights and stenographers) to deal with the amendments that had not been incorporated with agreement in the previous phase. It is necessary to take into account the complexity of the text (which has the character of an organic law) and the fact that the presentation incorporated a large number of amendments. In fact, the lawyers of the Lower House They are continuing to work on drafting the text which will now be debated in plenary.
We will have to wait for this text, because neither the Ministry of Equality nor the Socialist Group have been able to specify until now whether the wording of the standard includes retroactivity of correction.
Between the end of October and the beginning of 2025
Beyond this aspect, the other big question is when the correction will come into force. The parliamentary groups do not agree, although they agree that it will not be as “immediate” as Redondo suggests.
The norm is organic in nature, which complicates the deadlines, especially in the Senate where the PP is in the majority. Some speak of “five or six months” until the process is completed, which also requires parliamentary majorities. stronger than an ordinary law.
However, other conflicts recall the costly precedent of another recent organic regulation: the parity law itself. Between the presentation process and the final approval after passage in the Senate a month and a half has passed. As in the example, the new wording of the Statute could be published at the BOE in the first days of November. A long period in any case for the workers and the dismissed workers themselves who They have been waiting for an answer since August. to the uncertainty caused by the equality error.
