is in case of successive renewal of contracts. The Supreme Court jurisprudence on the case of a worker who, for over 20 years, had served in the Navy after the continuous updating of their relationship for a specified period, then was dismissed without the right to collect compensation. Even
, three judges of the Court also considered that private sector employees should be covered under this logic.
is the case of Jose Luis Ramos, who began work in 1976 in the Navy and served in the form of labor contracts until 1998, when the director of Naval Staff Weapons dissolved the link budgetary constraints.
The employee sought payment of their compensation, but the Navy claimed that he worked under Decree 4381/73 which can be contracted by project personnel for scientific research and technological development without access to redress in the case of termination of link.
The Chamber III of the Federal Court of Appeal of La Plata had rejected the claim of Ramos, but the judges of the Court: Ricardo Lorenzetti, Elena Highton de Nolasco, Enrique Petracchi y Carmen Argibay sostuvieron que los alcances de ese decreto se dan hasta los cinco años de renovación del contrato, y en ese caso las tareas del empleado no eran transitorias y que la Armada le había reconocido la antigüedad y los servicios sociales, según el fallo.
Así, para los magistrados "el comportamiento del Estado Nacional tuvo aptitud para generar en Ramos una legítima expectativa de permanencia laboral que merece la protección que el artículo 14 bis de la Constitución Nacional otorga al trabajador contra el "despido arbitrario".
Agregaron que la Armada "utilizó figuras jurídicas autorizadas legalmente para casos excepcionales, con una evidente desviación of power which aimed to cover up a permanent appointment under the guise of a fixed term contract.
For its part, the judges Carlos Fayt, Juan Carlos Maqueda and Raul Zaffaroni also endorsed the view of Ramos, adding that the case provides "to work in its various forms, including that develops in both the private and the public."
The three judges said that endorsing the hiring without limit and without rights would lead to the result of carrying out "no reason serious and objective explaining and justifying the use of the chosen mode and its compatibility with the Constitution. "
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION NO DUDE EN CONTACTARSE a los teléfonos (0342) 455.6354 o (0342) 155.472616, o a los e-mail: abogado.mas@gmail.com o ma_sandria@yahoo.com.ar
, three judges of the Court also considered that private sector employees should be covered under this logic.
is the case of Jose Luis Ramos, who began work in 1976 in the Navy and served in the form of labor contracts until 1998, when the director of Naval Staff Weapons dissolved the link budgetary constraints.
The employee sought payment of their compensation, but the Navy claimed that he worked under Decree 4381/73 which can be contracted by project personnel for scientific research and technological development without access to redress in the case of termination of link.
The Chamber III of the Federal Court of Appeal of La Plata had rejected the claim of Ramos, but the judges of the Court: Ricardo Lorenzetti, Elena Highton de Nolasco, Enrique Petracchi y Carmen Argibay sostuvieron que los alcances de ese decreto se dan hasta los cinco años de renovación del contrato, y en ese caso las tareas del empleado no eran transitorias y que la Armada le había reconocido la antigüedad y los servicios sociales, según el fallo.
Así, para los magistrados "el comportamiento del Estado Nacional tuvo aptitud para generar en Ramos una legítima expectativa de permanencia laboral que merece la protección que el artículo 14 bis de la Constitución Nacional otorga al trabajador contra el "despido arbitrario".
Agregaron que la Armada "utilizó figuras jurídicas autorizadas legalmente para casos excepcionales, con una evidente desviación of power which aimed to cover up a permanent appointment under the guise of a fixed term contract.
For its part, the judges Carlos Fayt, Juan Carlos Maqueda and Raul Zaffaroni also endorsed the view of Ramos, adding that the case provides "to work in its various forms, including that develops in both the private and the public."
The three judges said that endorsing the hiring without limit and without rights would lead to the result of carrying out "no reason serious and objective explaining and justifying the use of the chosen mode and its compatibility with the Constitution. "
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION NO DUDE EN CONTACTARSE a los teléfonos (0342) 455.6354 o (0342) 155.472616, o a los e-mail: abogado.mas@gmail.com o ma_sandria@yahoo.com.ar
0 comments:
Post a Comment