A disciplinary dismissal applied to a manager at the Mercadona chain was considered valid by the Spanish courts, after a succession of behaviors classified as very serious misconduct. The case has once again highlighted the limits of workplace behavior and the legal rules applicable to dismissals for just cause.
The Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha declared valid the disciplinary dismissal of a Mercadona manager who maintained behavior considered disruptive, despite several previous warnings and sanctions. Among the infractions found were serious insults directed at colleagues, repeated lack of respect and leaving the workplace without authorization, according to the Spanish digital newspaper Noticias Trabajo.
The worker had worked at the company since March 1, 1994, with the category of Manager A and a monthly salary of 2,101.80 euros. The dismissal was communicated by letter on July 27 last year, after more than 30 years of service, based on non-compliance classified as very serious.
Sanctioned behaviors and recidivism
According to the facts found, the manager addressed colleagues with offensive expressions such as “bootlicker”, among other more serious offenses, in addition to making personal purchases during working hours. These behaviors led to the application of a sanction a few weeks before the dismissal.
On the same day she was informed of this sanction, the Mercadona manager once again insulted colleagues, in the presence of superiors and customers, calling a worker “foolish” in a derogatory tone. In the dismissal letter, the company stated that “the insults and disruptive behavior” created “a hostile and tense work environment, negatively affecting the morale and productivity of the team and, consequently, the business organization itself”.
Abandonment of post and conflict with management
In June of the same year, while working at the registers, the worker left her post to greet a customer, leaving him unsupervised. This situation allowed another person to leave the establishment without paying, according to the previously mentioned source.
When she was warned by the coordinator, she reacted in a manner considered arrogant, abandoned the box and threatened to leave the workplace and go home, worsening the conflict.
Legal challenge to dismissal
Unsatisfied with the decision, the worker appealed to the courts, asking for the dismissal to be declared null or unfounded. Labor Court No. 1 of Ciudad Real rejected the action and considered the dismissal to be valid.
The manager then filed an appeal with the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha, insisting that the dismissal was unfounded. The main argument invoked was an alleged formal defect, arguing that the company did not allow him to exercise his right to defense before communicating his dismissal.
Decision of the Superior Court of Justice
The court had to analyze whether the disciplinary dismissal should be considered unfounded because a disciplinary process had not been previously initiated with a hearing of the worker. To this end, it resorted to the recent jurisprudence of the Spanish Supreme Court, namely ruling no. 1250/2024, which changed the previous doctrine by establishing that the prior hearing is, as a rule, a legal obligation.
However, according to the previously cited source, the Supreme Court itself allows exceptions, namely when it is unreasonable to require the employer to grant this hearing. The court concluded that, in this case, the dismissal occurred before the change in jurisprudential understanding, meaning that the application of this new criterion was not required. Furthermore, the judges highlighted that Mercadona’s collective employment contract did not obligatory provide for the carrying out of a prior disciplinary process, as this was merely a management option.
Confirmation of dismissal without compensation
Based on these grounds, the Superior Court of Justice rejected the worker’s appeal and confirmed the first instance decision, declaring the dismissal valid. As this is a disciplinary dismissal, the decision does not confer the right to any compensation. The sentence was not final at the time and could still be appealed to the Supreme Court, according to the .
What if it happened in Portugal?
In Portugal, disciplinary dismissal is regulated by the Labor Code, namely articles 351 et seq. For there to be just cause, the worker must have guilty behavior that makes the maintenance of the employment relationship immediately and practically impossible.
Unlike what happened in this case in Spain, Portuguese law requires, as a rule, the initiation of a disciplinary process with a prior hearing of the worker, guaranteeing the right to defense before the final decision. Failure to do so may lead to unlawful dismissal, with compensation or reinstatement consequences, depending on the specific situation.
Also read:
