A retired service-station employee with more than 43 years of service is entitled to 10,000 liters of fuel from his former employer following a ruling by the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha. The company calculated the award as 9,166.66 liters, arguing that the employee retired at 64 years and 10 months. The dispute turned on whether the agreement’s age-based benefit could be reduced month by month or whether his age at retirement placed him in the full 64-year bracket.
The case concerned Article 47 of the national collective agreement for service stations, which sets different fuel awards for voluntary retirement before age 67. The schedule set 11,000 liters at 63 and 10,000 at 64, then 9,000 at 65 and 8,000 at 66. The benefit may be received as fuel or exchanged for other products, subject to the agreement’s service and notice requirements, including at least 10 years of employment.
The employee notified the company in November 2023 that he intended to retire the following month and claim the benefit. After his contract ended in December, he renewed the request and proposed several ways to receive the fuel. The company accepted that he qualified but disputed the amount, seeking to reduce it by 833.34 liters. The difference between the two calculations is less than one cubic meter of fuel.
The Social Court in Talavera de la Reina rejected the company’s calculation and ordered it to provide the full 10,000 liters. It allowed the employee to collect the fuel in stages instead of in a single transaction, making delivery more practicable while preserving the full award.
On appeal, the regional high court upheld the annual age brackets instead of treating the benefit as a monthly accrual. The court reasoned that a monthly reduction would introduce a calculation method absent from the negotiated terms. Because the employee had not yet reached 65 when he retired, he remained in the 64-year bracket. The court also rejected the company’s argument that he had notified it too late, accepting his pre-retirement email as sufficient. The employer had recognized his entitlement and contested only the quantity.
The company was ordered to pay €800 in legal costs and could forfeit its appeal deposit if the ruling becomes final. The decision may still be challenged before the Supreme Court. It does not automatically determine every retirement-benefit claim: eligibility and the amount depend on the wording of the applicable collective agreement and the circumstances of each case.
The ruling concerns a collectively negotiated employment benefit, not the calculation of a state pension. Early-retirement incentives and pension entitlements are governed by separate rules, so receiving a contractual fuel award does not by itself establish how a worker’s pension will be calculated. The dispute highlights the practical importance of the agreement’s age thresholds and eligibility conditions, including its notice requirements.
