The Supreme Court has ruled that companies must guarantee the worker a prior hearing before proceeding with a disciplinary dismissal.
This decision, which revises the doctrine consolidated over more than three decades, puts an end to the uncertainty generated in recent months regarding the management of disciplinary sanctions in the business environment. The basis for this change lies in the interpretation of Convention 158 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO), in force in Spain since 1986, which aligns national regulations with international labour protection standards.
The ruling has practical implications of great relevance for human resources departments, which will have to adapt their processes to include this procedure as a mandatory step, even in those cases where the applicable collective agreement does not expressly require it.
Although the ruling does not detail the consequences of not complying with this requirement, the recommendation is to avoid legal risks and to comply with it scrupulously.
In this regard, and in the absence of a more specific regulation, it is key to consider the following:
- Record in writing compliance with the hearing procedure to ensure evidence in the event of litigation.
- Provide a reasonable period of time for the employee’s allegations, respecting the statute of limitations for disciplinary offences.
- Integrate the employee’s allegations in the final decision, reflecting them in the dismissal notice to demonstrate that the hearing had a real impact.
A relevant aspect is that, for greater legal certainty, this new doctrine will only be applicable to dismissals made after the publication of the judgment. This means that it will not affect dismissals made prior to this date.
In conclusion, this ruling not only consolidates the importance of international standards in the Spanish labour field, but also provides greater clarity and legal certainty in the handling of disciplinary measures. The Supreme Court’s position establishes a uniform criterion that eliminates the previous uncertainty and reinforces the need for companies to be more rigorous in the management of disciplinary dismissals.