‘Pérez-Llorca Labour Law Update’ Special Session: The new obligation to hold a prior hearing before a dismissal

Pérez-Llorca’s Employment, Compensation and Benefits practice area organised a special session of the Pérez-Llorca Labour Law Update to analyse the recent Supreme Court ruling no. 1250/2024, of 18 November, which establishes the obligation to hold a prior hearing before companies can dismiss employees for disciplinary reasons.

Partners of the practice area Daniel Cifuentes and Isabel Moya attended the event, which was held online, and offered a detailed analysis of the ruling’s legal implications, providing a clear and practical overview of how companies should adapt their internal procedures to this new regulation.

The requirement for a prior hearing applies to disciplinary dismissals and is designed to give employees the opportunity to challenge and defend themselves against the allegations made against them. Although there is no specific time limit for this, it is suggested that it should be reasonable, varying between 24 and 72 hours depending on the complexity of the matter. “A period of 72 hours is more conservative and advisable,” noted Cifuentes, who also pointed out that an investigator would not be necessary during this process.

With regard to the presentation of evidence to prove alleged breaches to the worker, Moya explained that it is not obligatory for companies to offer the means of proof they have to the employee, although “if the facts are not clear and the employee requests proof, it is advisable to provide it.” Furthermore, the Pérez-Llorca partner explained that, during the prior hearing period, companies can offer or propose to the employee the option of being released from the provision of services, although they can never demand this.

In relation to employees who, when summoned to the preliminary hearing or made aware of the situation, request a reduction or adjustment of working hours to avoid dismissal, Moya explained that it is possible to proceed with dismissal if an abusive situation of power is evident. “It is crucial to pre-empt that the worker’s request is unlawful in the communication,” Moya recommended.

To conclude the session, the experts emphasised the importance of properly planning the dismissal process to avoid legal problems. “Although it is technically possible to hold the prior hearing and deliver the letter of dismissal at the same meeting, it is not recommended. It is essential to give the employee at least 24 hours to defend themselves in writing,” concluded Cifuentes. In this regard, Moya added that “it is crucial that companies adapt their internal procedures to comply with this new legal requirement.”