The Supreme Court corrects its doctrine on the abuse of interns. The Judicial Power has reported a first sentence in this regard, which will be followed by more, they explain from the judiciary. The Plenary of the Fourth Chamber of the Supreme Court has rectified this Monday its criterion on the maximum duration of the interim contract for vacancy in the public sector after the Court of Justice of the European Union (TUE) issued a critical ruling on the past 3 of June. The high court now establishes that, in general, a duration of an interim vacancy “greater than three years should be considered unjustifiably long”, which will mean that the interim worker passes to hold the condition of indefinite non-permanent.
The Government delays a week the reform against the abuse of interns to try an agreement with communities and unions
To date, the Supreme Court had ruled out that the three-year term, set forth in article 70.1 of the EBEP (Basic Statute of Public Employees) as the limit to convene the selection process of a vacant position, “would be applied automatically to convert to an interim in indefinite non-permanent “, reminds to this medium the professor of Labor Law Ignasi Beltrán.
In the absence of knowing the detail of the sentence – which the Supreme Court will release “shortly” – that first substantial change in its criteria can already be seen. “In the absence of any regulatory provision, the Chamber understands, in general, that a duration of more than three years should be considered unjustifiably long, which will mean that the temporary worker will become indefinite non-permanent”, states the statement from the Judicial Power which advances the ruling.
The ‘indefinite non-permanent’ is a labor figure created by the courts as a result of lawsuits from temporary employees of the public sector. With this figure, the worker in question can remain in the vacant position until the Administration awards the position through a selective process as required by law or amortizes the position (eliminates it) if it is not necessary.
Budget excuses are not worth it
In addition, Professor Beltrán highlights to this medium another significant novelty in the Supreme Court’s doctrine: to avoid this conversion from temporary to permanent non-permanent, the budgetary excuses, which had convinced the magistrates on occasions in past complaints, will not be valid.
This was one of the criticisms of the European magistrates to the Supreme Court in its recent ruling at the beginning of June, in which it again concluded that in Spain there are no measures to prevent or punish temporary abuse in public administrations. In this verdict, the CJEU rejected various elements of the Supreme Court’s doctrine on interim abuses, such as the fact that the court does not consider that there is abuse in the event of a very long interim, due to the fact that several contracts have not been chained, but only a very long one has been produced.
“The calculation of such term”, the court now refers to about the three-year limit mentioned, “cannot be interrupted by budgetary regulations on the paralysis of public job offers, since the coverage of vacancies covered by temporary workers does not imply budgetary increase “, explains the note of the Judicial Power.