A separate ruling by the High Court of Justice of La Rioja shows that disciplinary dismissal depends on the seriousness of the proven conduct and whether the sanction is proportionate. The case involved a nurse employed by Mutua Universal Mugenat in Calahorra, not repeated early departures. The court overturned a lower court decision from Logroño and classified the dismissal as unfair.
The dispute concerned the nurse’s failure to attend a clinical meeting on 14 November and an email response to a Fremap employee dated 29 October. The court concluded that those acts did not amount to a very serious breach of disobedience. It stressed that an employer’s instruction must be clear and precise before an employee can be disciplined for disobeying it.
Proportionality in Disciplinary Dismissal
Spanish employment disputes assess the seriousness and culpability of the conduct alongside the proportionality of the penalty. Under the gradualist approach applied by the La Rioja court, proving a breach does not by itself make dismissal appropriate: the facts must justify the maximum disciplinary sanction.
That principle is relevant to disputes about working hours. Evidence of a clear workplace rule, reliable time records and the employee’s response to instructions can matter when assessing alleged unauthorized departures. The distinction is between leaving at the scheduled end of a shift and leaving early in breach of a clear instruction; the legal outcome depends on the evidence and circumstances of the individual case.
Outcome and Compensation
The employer was given the choice of reinstating the nurse under the same employment conditions, with back pay, or paying compensation of €62,598.65. One contemporaneous account put back pay at €95.57 a day from the effective dismissal date of 23 December 2024. The judgment was reported as subject to a possible appeal to the Supreme Court.
The decision, announced by Spain’s General Council of the Judiciary, shows that dismissal is not automatic whenever an employee breaches a workplace rule. Courts examine whether the conduct was sufficiently serious and culpable, and whether the employer’s instructions were clear. In this case, the regional court held that the proven conduct did not justify dismissal.
