Despido por hurto

The Cantabrian Justice ratifies the dismissal of a Carrefour worker for the theft of several earrings valued at 24 euros

The dismissal of a Carrefour employee who stole three packs of earrings with a combined price of 23.97 euros and who had been working for a supermarket of this chain since 1998 has been ratified in a ruling handed down by the Superior Court of Justice of Cantabria. The Court has determined that the worker had the obligation to act in accordance with the rules of good faith, which did not happen, since she also knew that they did not have an alarm.

The events judged date back to the workday of December 29, 2022, when he removed from the stand where there were some new earrings that had arrived at the store to be sold and which he observed carefully after putting on his glasses.

That same day, around 3:35 p.m., after finishing his workday, he went to the checkout line to pay for a sweatshirt, but the earrings were in the pockets of the garment. The colleague in charge of collecting payment, who had only been working in the supermarket for 3 months, was the one who realized it when she manipulated the garment.

The worker excused herself by stating that “what people were like, they put things inside their clothes.” On January 18, Carrefour handed him the dismissal letter, considering that the facts constituted very serious infractions that were classified in articles 55.2 and 55.13 of the State Collective Agreement of Department Stores and 54.2 d) of the Statute of the Workers.

All the workers knew that there were video surveillance cameras whose clause was included in the contract.


The reasons for the dismissal, argued in the letter


They explained to him that his actions were incompatible with any employment relationship because his obligations were to act in accordance with the rules of good faith with the utmost diligence and responsibility and to avoid any situation that would be fraudulent towards the company.

Well, “the acquisition or consumption of any item for sale in the workplace requires the essential and unavoidable obligation to previously pay the amount for each and every one of the products,” they explained in the letter.

To this they added that, regardless of the value of the products, this represented a loss of trust and a violation of loyalty.

Not being satisfied with the dismissal, the worker sued the company and the Social Court No. 5 of Santander rejected it and declared the dismissal as appropriate, so she appealed the ruling before the TSJ of Cantabria.

In the appeal he stated that the lower court ruling contained proven facts that had not been proven in the trial and that, therefore, the Regulatory Law of social jurisdiction was being violated, as well as the Organic Law of the Judiciary and article 24.1 of the Spanish Constitution.


The TSJ of Cantabria recognizes the origin of the dismissal


However, for the magistrates, “the exemplary sentence expresses, fulfilling the requirements of article 97.2 of the LRJS, that the facts declared proven have been fully accredited by the evidence assessed as a whole and in particular by the testimonies referred to.”

On the other hand, they questioned the evidence obtained by the Carrefour cameras. But “as has been expressed, the tenth clause of the contracts warns of the existence of the cameras” and the purposes for which the company can use the recordings, even for the adoption of a disciplinary measure like the current one.

Furthermore, for the Court, it was not credible that the employee – who had provided different versions – did not realize that the earrings were in the sweatshirt because “the cardboard took up a significant space in the pocket of the sweatshirt and it is not credible that “You wouldn’t notice it when you placed the garment in the cart and then on the checkout belt.”

Therefore, they have dismissed the claim and have endorsed the admissibility of the dismissal.

Podemos ayudarte