The Advocate General of the EU considers it a violation of the European directive on employment discrimination that the group of Air Nostrum cabin workers – made up almost entirely of women – receive lower allowances than their fellow pilots – most of whom are men. for covering the same flights. The European justice system will once again resolve possible discriminatory treatment based on sex between different employees of the same company after receiving a preliminary ruling from the National Court. The case is based on a lawsuit against the Valencian airline, which has had an agreement with Iberia for decades under which it operates under the Iberia Regional brand. Although the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has not yet ruled, the Advocate General of the EU announced his conclusions this Thursday. This ruling does not imply that the final ruling is along the same lines, but it does tend to coincide in the vast majority of cases. Community justice has already failed in this regard in similar conflicts, such as that of domestic workers.
The question raised by the National Court to the CJEU refers to a case initiated in 2002 and which pits the Union of Airline Flight Attendants (STAVLA) against Air Nostrum. The workers’ representatives filed an appeal for partial annulment of the agreement that applies to cabin crew, on the grounds that indirect discrimination on the basis of sex was taking place in relation to the daily allowances for maintenance of this group, made up of 94 % by women. The reason they allege is that the amounts they receive are significantly lower than those earned by pilots, among whom 93.71% are men.
The airline denied such discrimination, appealing to the fact that both groups of employees are governed by different collective agreements, which had been negotiated with their representatives, and that, furthermore, the first to be signed had been that of the cabin workers. Despite the fact that the National Court determined that such a distinction is not a sufficient argument to justify that the different groups receive different allowances – in fact, it considers that maintenance allowances are not considered a salary, so a variation in their salary cannot be justified. amount depending on the value of the tasks carried out by each of the groups—considered that discrimination would be more evident if both groups were governed by the same agreement. A dilemma that was transferred to the CJEU for resolution.
Although the STAVLA withdrew in 2023, the case survived because the Prosecutor’s Office picked up the witness and the National Court, in view of this change, considered it appropriate to keep the consultation of the European judicial bodies in force. And the first movement is the one that occurred this Thursday with the conclusions of the Advocate General, who has proposed to the European Court that this situation be declared contrary to the Community directive, even though both groups of workers are governed by different agreements.
Although the Polish lawyer, Maciej Szpunar, indicates that it is up to the National Court to determine whether this indirect discrimination is real, he indicates a series of sections that endorse this position. On the one hand, he points out that allowances are part of the working conditions, and not the salary, so the community directive can be applied to them. And on the other hand, he appeals to the percentages previously indicated as irrefutable proof that there is a group of working women who are being paid less in this section than a group of men, which places them in a disadvantaged situation. Furthermore, he appeals that the fact that both agreements have been negotiated with the social partners is not a sufficient argument to justify such a difference in treatment.
Finally, the document indicates that the company has not presented to the National Court any objective element that contravenes this reading of the situation and justifies the determination of different amounts, although it opens the door for new evidence to be presented that demonstrates that the objective of This measure is alien to any discrimination based on sex. In that case, it will be the Spanish justice system that must determine whether these are sufficient and appropriate.
Background
This is not the first time that European justice must rule on possible practices contrary to the community framework in the fight against employment discrimination in Spain. In February 2022, the CJEU already recognized the right of domestic employees — a union that also has a percentage of women present greater than 90% — to collect the unemployment benefit that Social Security denied them, on the understanding that Discrimination on the basis of sex was taking place. This pronouncement led to a decree approved by the Council of Ministers that corrected Spanish regulations and granted this right to the group of female workers.
At the moment there are no established deadlines for the final resolution of the CJEU. If the response was in line with what the Advocate General pointed out, it would then be the National Court that would have to resolve the case, and, depending on the scope of the response, a regulatory modification could come into play, such as the one that occurred with the employees. of home.
Follow all the information Economy and Business in Facebook and xor in our weekly newsletter
#Lawyer #considers #discriminatory #pay #diems #flight #attendants #pilots