The Supreme Court has clarified the limits of objective dismissal for supervening ineptitudeRemembering that the company must prove it has previously attempted adapt the job or relocate the worker before terminating the contract. Failure to take these actions may result in a declaration of unfair dismissal.
What is supervening incompetence and when can it justify dismissal?
The supervening ineptitude, regulated in article 52.a) of the Workers' Statute, occurs when a worker loses the ability to perform his job after having been initially fit.
This situation is usually supported by reports from prevention services, which must detail the specific limitations of the worker and their impact on the functions of the positionwithout limiting itself to a simple generic declaration of "unsuitable".
The Supreme Court points out that this type of dismissal cannot be based solely on that report, but must be accompanied by sufficient justification and other evidence that proves the real impossibility of continuing the employment relationship.
The key: job adaptation or prior relocation
The central element of the ruling is clear: Before dismissing someone, the company is obliged to try to maintain the worker's employment..
This means that you must demonstrate that you have carried out one of these actions:
- Adapting the job to the worker's new capabilities
- Offer a compatible alternative position within the company
- Or justify that these measures impose an excessive burden.
Furthermore, the burden of proof lies with the company, which must prove that it has complied with these obligations.
What happens if the company does not meet these requirements?
In the case analyzed by the Supreme Court, the company failed to demonstrate that it had attempted to adapt the position or relocate the worker to another compatible one.
As a result, the dismissal was classified as unfairthus reinforcing the principle that termination of the contract should always be the last resort.
Influence of European law
The ruling also aligns with the doctrine of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which requires companies to carry out reasonable adjustments to guarantee job continuity, especially in situations related to disability.
This reinforces the interpretation that it is not enough to prove incompetence, but it is necessary to demonstrate that all possible alternatives have been explored before terminating the contract.
Practical implications for businesses
This resolution has a direct impact on the labor management of companies, which will have to:
- Review the procedures for objective dismissal
- Properly document attempts at adaptation or relocation
- Coordinate with prevention services
- Evaluate whether alternative positions are available
In short, dismissal due to supervening incompetence now requires a higher level of justification and prior planning.
The importance of employment counseling
In these types of situations, having expert advice is key to avoiding mistakes that could lead to unfair dismissal.
If your company is facing a similar situation or you need to review a labor procedure, you can consult with our team to analyze your situation and act with legal certainty.
English 
Spanish