European Restructuring Monitor (ERM)
Eurofound's ERM database on restructuring-related legal regulations provides information on regulations in the Member States of the European Union and Norway which are explicitly or implicitly linked to anticipating and managing change.
Article 51 Statute of Workers’ Rights; Article 122 Law 36/2011; Article 18 Article Law 3/2012; Article 11 Royal Decree 11/2013
In the event of non-compliance with legislation and the negotiation procedure in case of collective dismissals, worker representatives (workers’ delegates, working committees or trade unions) can challenge the procedure and take action against the employer in the Social Court. In such cases, the judge can rule that the dismissal procedure is null and void. Furthermore, access to the Compensation Fund (Fondo de Garantía Salarial) can be denied.
Under Spanish law, a dismissal is considered to be ‘collective’ where the termination of employment contracts are based on economic, organisational, technical or productive grounds. To be considered 'collective', such terminations must concern more than 5 employees if the whole workforce is affected, at least 10 employees in companies smaller than 100 employees, 10% of the employees in companies between 100 and 299 employees, or at least 30 employees in companies with more than 299 employees.
There are no criminal sanctions if the employer does not adhere to the procedure set by the law. The action that can be taken by the Social Court (Tribunal de lo Social) is to rule that the dismissal procedure is null and void. In those cases workers have to be reinstated in the company.
In the event of unfair dismissal, as declared by the court, the employer can choose compensation in lieu of reinstatement. The compensation amounts to 33 days' pay for each year of service up to a maximum of 24 months' pay. In case of reinstatement, the employer is to reimburse the employee counting from the day of dismissal until the day of the court's decision or until the employee finds another job, should this happen before the court makes a ruling on the matter.
According to the OECD (2013), the elimination of administrative authorisation in collective dismissals by Law 3/2012 increased the uncertainty about the final cost for employers of dismissal decisions. Even if the litigation rate as regards collective redundancies remained relatively low (below 5%), a large share of concluded procedures concerning collective dismissals resulted in court rulings against the employer. In most of these cases, the judges ruled that the dismissal procedure was null and void and ordered the reinstatement of the affected workers with backpay. This was a new situation in the Spanish labour market. Moreover, in most cases, the court decisions against employers was based on non-compliance with the negotiation procedure rather than the dismissal causes. These shortcomings of the new regulations of collective dismissals were partly addressed by the Royal Decree law 11/2013, which defined in a more precise way the requirements of the consultation procedure and the cases in which the dismissal can be declared void.
Eurofound (2015), Spain: Effects of non-compliance with dismissal regulations, Restructuring legislation database, Dublin, https://apps.eurofound.europa.eu/legislationdb/effects-of-non-compliance-with-dismissal-regulations/spain
This Eurofound research paper explores key trends in restructuring in recent years, highlighting the companies that announced the largest job losses and job gains in the EU. It builds on an analysis of company announcements recorded in Eurofound’s European Restructuring Monitor (ERM), alongside a new classification of restructuring events involving changes in company location.
:quality(80))
Employers increasingly use tools such as email, SMS and messaging apps like WhatsApp or Signal to communicate with employees. While these technologies offer both efficiency and convenience, their use in communicating sensitive information, particularly for notifying employees of dismissal, raises legal concerns. This article explores the legal framework on dismissals across the EU, with a special focus on the use of digital means for communicating employment dismissals. Drawing on examples from various Member States, it examines the legal validity of digital dismissals.
:quality(80))
In 2023, thousands of workers in big tech lost their jobs. Meta, Amazon, Google, Apple, Microsoft and Salesforce had been considered to offer good and secure jobs up to this point. Giants of the information and communication technology (ICT) sector, these companies are among the highest paying, with Eurostat data from 2022 indicating that workers in ICT had the second-highest median gross hourly earnings (surpassed only by earnings in the financial sector).[1] These layoffs were a shock, especially as the biggest companies had hired extensively during the COVID-19 pandemic. What happened in the two years after this redundancy wave – was that the end of the cuts or did the companies start expanding again?
:quality(80))
In 2024, the automotive sector in the EU came to the fore in public and policy discussions. The focus was on the slowdown in electric vehicle (EV) sales, rising global competition, belated investments in new technologies, and the potential closure of production lines in Europe. A number of European car manufacturers and suppliers announced their intention to make large-scale redundancies and change long-standing collective agreements on job security and wages, while workers raised concerns amid demonstrations and industrial action.
:quality(80))