Beer during work hours not wrong? Spain court rules in favor of terminated employee
For a high court in Spain, consuming alcohol during work hours isn't necessarily wrong and shouldn't lead to termination. A recent ruling found that a company was mistaken in firing its employee in 2021 for drinking beer while on duty.
The Guardian reported that the electrical company, which is based in the southeastern region of Murcia, had provided insufficient grounds for the worker's dismissal.
The man had worked for the company for 27 years. He was dismissed after his employer reportedly sent a private detective to follow him in July 2021, according to The Guardian.
The man and his colleague were seen stopping for a drink at a bar, though the detective wasn't able to immediately specify whether their drink was alcoholic. During lunchtime, the workers were reportedly buying bread, food, and cans of beer. At nighttime, he reportedly bought another can of beer before driving back to their office.
Two weeks later, the man and two colleagues were reportedly drinking cans of beer between mid-morning and the end of their lunch break. Six days later, he was reportedly drinking beer before lunch, during which he had three glasses of red wine and a shot of pomace brandy while eating.
The dismissal letter said the man was being fired for “repeated and excessive alcohol consumption during the working day, which endangered his physical wellbeing and that of his workmates,” according to The Guardian. The man, then, sued his former company.
The high court found that the company's actions didn't have basis. It noted that the worker's drinking took place exclusively during breaks, and whether it was in a "healthy fashion or not," they were also eating and needed to "take refreshments."
The court also ruled that it had not been possible to determine the amount of beer the worker and his colleagues have consumed, in light of whether he had been over the limit to drive.
Still, the court said there was nothing to suggest that his work had been impaired.
“At no time did the private detective make mentions of signs of inebriation or clumsiness when it came to walking,” it said in its ruling, as quoted by The Guardian. “There is no proof—documentary, expert or witness—that unequivocally demonstrates that the man was under the effects of alcohol and was inebriated, intoxicated, or drunk."
“Neither has it been proved, even circumstantially, that his physical and mental faculties were reduced or diminished during his tasks as an electrician, nor that he was impeded when he drove the company van at the end of the working day," the court said.
The company, it added, didn't take into account the Murcian summer that prompted the worker to have a cold one.
The court ordered the company to reinstate the worker, if not pay him €47,000 (P2.8 million) as compensation.