Isabel Díaz Ayuso has publicly supported Alberto Núñez Feijóo’s remarks on sick leave and absenteeism. The debate has sparked criticism from unions and political rivals. The issue now centers on fraud, worker rights, and the cost to Spain.
The debate over sick leave in Spain intensified after Isabel Díaz Ayuso, president of the Comunidad de Madrid, firmly endorsed the recent comments by Partido Popular leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo. Ayuso described Feijóo’s position as entirely justified, arguing that the country needs a more balanced approach to managing workplace absences and the associated costs. Her intervention comes as the PP faces mounting criticism for suggesting that workers on temporary incapacity should receive reduced pay and for labeling absenteeism a “cancer.”
Feijóo’s remarks, delivered at a business forum in the Basque Country, triggered immediate backlash from unions and political opponents. He argued that if collective agreements allow employees to earn the same while on leave as when working, it creates a problematic incentive. The government, led by Pedro Sánchez, responded sharply, warning that such rhetoric signals a return to austerity policies reminiscent of the Rajoy era. Sánchez, speaking from Ankara during a NATO summit, accused the PP of preparing for future cuts if they return to power.
In the wake of the controversy, the PP leadership moved quickly to clarify Feijóo’s intent, emphasizing that his comments targeted fraudulent sick leave rather than legitimate medical absences. Ayuso echoed this distinction, stressing that the debate is not about penalizing those with genuine illnesses, such as cancer or pregnancy, but about addressing abuse and seeking fairness. She argued that the real issue is finding equilibrium between protecting workers and preventing misuse of the system.
Unions were quick to condemn the PP’s position. The secretary general of Comisiones Obreras, Unai Sordo, accused the party of stigmatizing workers who are medically required to take leave. Amyts, the leading medical union in Madrid, also criticized the narrative, warning that it unfairly casts suspicion on both patients and the doctors who authorize sick leave. The union called for a more nuanced and evidence-based discussion, rejecting any implication of widespread fraud without solid proof.
Ayuso, however, maintained that Spain’s current regulations make hiring appear suspect and cited figures previously mentioned by Feijóo, claiming that sick leave costs the country €30 billion annually. Official data from Social Security for 2025 shows public spending on temporary incapacity reached €18.4 billion, making it the second-largest item after pensions. Businesses contributed an additional €17 billion, according to the CEOE employers’ association.
She also pointed to the lower rate of sick leave among self-employed workers as evidence that some absences could be avoided, calling the situation unfair to colleagues and small businesses. Ayuso argued that when employees are absent, the burden falls on their coworkers and can threaten the survival of smaller firms facing persistent absenteeism.
The controversy deepened over Feijóo’s use of the word “cancer” to describe absenteeism, a comparison that drew particular ire. Borja Sémper, the PP’s national spokesperson and a cancer survivor, urged caution with such analogies, acknowledging that the term can be hurtful. He also clarified that not all sick leave is fraudulent and opposed any reduction in pay for workers on medical leave, insisting that illness is not a matter of choice.
This debate over sick leave and absenteeism is not isolated. Internal tensions within the PP have surfaced in other regions as well, as seen when Francisco Camps pressed for a party congress in Valencia amid leadership disputes. For more on the party’s internal dynamics, see this report on calls for a PP congress in Valencia.
Spain’s approach to sick leave remains a contentious issue, balancing the need to protect workers’ rights with the financial sustainability of the system. The current debate highlights the challenges of distinguishing between legitimate medical absences and potential abuse, as well as the broader political stakes for both the government and the opposition. As the discussion continues, any changes to the law or enforcement practices could have significant implications for employees, employers, and the public sector alike.
