Post by account_disabled on Mar 12, 2024 23:46:33 GMT -5
In the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff, the plaintiff challenged the dismissal and requested its annulment along with compensation of 7,501 euros for moral damages caused by violating fundamental rights. However, the Social Court No. 2 of Vigo dismissed the claim in its entirety, ruling out the existence of discrimination based on sex.
The plaintiff alleged in the appeal that in the defendant company there was a gender pay gap, both in the workforce as a whole, and in the position of coordinator where the gap DJ USA between men and women, who receive said supplement, is significant. and considering that the performance of coordinator activities by the plaintiff must be recognized as a proven fact, taking into account the payment of the complement, there is a difference in the regulatory salary that the company computes for the purposes of compensation, for dismissal, which determines that there compensation less than what she should receive has been made available to the plaintiff.
In addition, it also alleged that the difference in the payment of compensation comes from a wage gap that corresponds to discrimination based on gender/sex verified in the diagnosis of the situation within the processing of the equality plan , so the difference As for compensation, it causes the dismissal to be inadmissible.
For all these reasons, he requested in the appeal that the lower court ruling be revoked and that the dismissal be declared unfair, with the business party having to choose between compensating him by calculating a monthly salary of 3,838.99 euros with a seniority of 2003 to the amount of 90,873. .63 eros, or to their reinstatement with the payment of processing salaries.
The plaintiff alleged in the appeal that in the defendant company there was a gender pay gap, both in the workforce as a whole, and in the position of coordinator where the gap DJ USA between men and women, who receive said supplement, is significant. and considering that the performance of coordinator activities by the plaintiff must be recognized as a proven fact, taking into account the payment of the complement, there is a difference in the regulatory salary that the company computes for the purposes of compensation, for dismissal, which determines that there compensation less than what she should receive has been made available to the plaintiff.
In addition, it also alleged that the difference in the payment of compensation comes from a wage gap that corresponds to discrimination based on gender/sex verified in the diagnosis of the situation within the processing of the equality plan , so the difference As for compensation, it causes the dismissal to be inadmissible.
For all these reasons, he requested in the appeal that the lower court ruling be revoked and that the dismissal be declared unfair, with the business party having to choose between compensating him by calculating a monthly salary of 3,838.99 euros with a seniority of 2003 to the amount of 90,873. .63 eros, or to their reinstatement with the payment of processing salaries.