The right to reasonable adjustments is not absolute: the Court draws the line between disability protection and business viability. The worker's physical limitations made it impossible for her to remain without seriously altering the organization.

The appeal 5121/2024 raised by both parties (worker and company) is resolved in relation to the dismissal procedure processed by the Social Court No. 2 of Ferrol (records 874/2023).

The worker, a home help assistant, was on medical leave from September 2022 to July 2023 due to chronic heart disease. After being discharged, he enjoyed his vacation and rejoined in August 2023, serving for a month. She was evaluated by the prevention service, which initially declared her suitable with limitations (avoid loads greater than 10 kg). Subsequently, two reports were issued that concluded that was not suitable for his usual position.

On September 8, 2023, the company informed him by certified SMS that he had to cease providing services maintaining the salary, and on October 27, 2023, he received the dismissal letter by email for sudden ineptitude as a cause of contractual termination.

According to the INSS Professional Assessment Guide, the position of home help assistant It involves assistance tasks in hygiene, nutrition, mobility and medication, as well as emotional support, cleaning the environment, washing clothes and preparing meals. These functions require medium-high physical effort , classified into degrees of physical demand (1, 2 and 3).

The lower court ruling partially upheld the claim of the worker and declared the dismissal unfair carried out by the company on October 27, 2023. The company was sentenced to choose between reinstating the worker or paying compensation of 5,275.81 euros. The rest of the claims made by the plaintiff, the declaration of nullity of the dismissal and the claim for additional compensation, were rejected. Both parties, partially dissatisfied with the ruling, presented an appeal before the Superior Court of Justice of Galicia:

The worker appealed, requesting that the dismissal be declared void, considering that her fundamental rights were violated (among them, the right to non-discrimination due to disability or illness).

For its part, the company appealed, defending the admissibility of the dismissal, supported by the medical reports of “unfitness” issued by the prevention service, which, in its opinion, objectively justified the termination of the contract due to sudden unfitness.

The object of the litigation revolves around whether the sudden ineptitude alleged by the company has sufficient support in medical reports and if said cause legally justifies an objective dismissal, according to the article 52 a) of the Workers' Statute.

Also, it is analyzed whether the dismissal could have represented a indirect discrimination based on disability, which would lead to declaring his nullity, in accordance with the doctrine of the Constitutional Court and the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court.

The Court examines the current legal framework:

• Law 15/2022, on equal treatment and non-discrimination: includes illness or health condition as a cause of discrimination and prohibits any provision or conduct that violates equality, such as the denial of reasonable adjustments and direct, indirect or association discrimination.
• Disability is protected by article 14 of the Spanish Constitution.
• The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ratified by Spain, requires measures such as reasonable adjustments and considers their denial discriminatory.
• Royal Legislative Decree 1/2013 incorporates these obligations, defining reasonable adjustments and establishing that they should not represent an excessive burden for the company.
• At European level, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Directive 2000/78/EC reinforce the right to non-discrimination due to disability in employment.

The TSJ of Galicia analyzes the case: The worker was on sick leave due to a chronic heart condition (coronary episode). After being discharged, he maintains permanent limitations (he cannot carry more than 10 kg) and is recognized as a disabled person, not just sick. The worker maintains that she can perform her job with adjustments, which forces the company to apply reasonable adjustments, unless they entail a disproportionate burden.

Article 52 a) of the Workers' Statute allows dismissal for incompetence, but only if reasonable adjustments are not possible or are burdensome.

The doctrine (STS 02/23/2022) indicates that medical reports or reports from the prevention service are not enough to justify dismissal; It is necessary to justify the specific limitations and how they affect the essential functions of the position.

In this case, the limitations are permanent, although it is debated whether they affect all the essential functions of the position. The position includes personal care tasks (80%) and domestic care (20%), many of which require physical effort, especially with second and third degree users. The company did not demonstrate that it had exhausted reorganization options, although the judge proposed using cranes, assigning less dependent users and distributing tasks.

The company alleged logistical limitations: it has only 13 cranes for 200 users, exclusive assignment to grade 1 users is unfeasible, and accompaniment by another worker would double resources. There is no intermediate category with a lower load.

The Court concludes that the impossibility of adapting the position has been duly proven., since these permanent limitations, which are unexpected, affect the bulk of their tasks with sufficient magnitude to determine an ineptitude for their profession.The right to reasonable adjustments is not absolute and is limited by reasonableness and the burden on the company, which is met in this case.

For all these reasons, the TSJ revokes the lower court ruling, declares the dismissal for objective reasons due to sudden ineptitude appropriate in accordance with article 52 a) of the Workers' Statute,and rules out discrimination.