The image of the CCOO PV campaign against the crisis in the main city bus travel in Valencia.
During the week of decent work, the five al'onze October, the information campaign launched by the Workers' Commissions Valencia crisis cure: decent work will require "Transported" in the back and side panels of five buses when buses were inserted campaign posters belonging to lines 2, 7, 9, 16 and 81 of the Metropolitan Transport Company and cross Valencia city throughout the day.
Hundreds of delegates CCOO PV overflow assemblies of the second World Day for DecentCentenars of Labour delegates CCOO PV overflow assemblies of the second World Day for Decent Work
articles of opinion :
Cheaper dismissal as a cover
Not long ago, a hundred cases of labor market experts launched a decalogue of measures to get us out of the crisis. A crisis that, as they themselves pointed, did not have its origin in the labor market, giving them the same, since its proposal was intended to act precisely on it. There is a popular saying that clearly reflects the essence of this way of structuring thought, and that is to say "that's like if you itch you scratch your head and heels."
again emphasizes blame the current situation the weakest in the social fabric by reducing their right to decent, stable and guaranteed. Moreover, the approach is doubly cynical, proposing to achieve this by way of cheapening the cost of unfair dismissal, which determines the level of protection for workers against arbitrary decisions of the employer to put it out on the street. The unjust measure proposed would apply only to workers who regulate their working conditions through their collective agreements or the status of workers, where they rarely get better statutory compensation for unfair dismissal. Paradoxically, those who defend lowering the need for this often shield their own labor contracts with much higher compensation to which they are intended to reduce.
Highlight major fires in Spain. The dismissal for misconduct, ie, when an employer dismisses an employee for failing to comply with the obligations arising from his employment contract has no cost. If an employer fired for improper performance of the employee, the cost to the employer is zero euros.
individual or collective dismissal for objective reasons, reasons that it is due to technical, organizational, economic or production, and the employer is doomed because it can prove that there are economic problems, including child benefit, or organizational changes that improve the situation of the company and its competitiveness, or if there is introduction of new technical processes, etc.., has a cost to the employer of 20 days' wages per year worked, capped salary of an annuity. In companies with fewer than 25 employees that cost is reduced to only 12 days, since the rest is assumed by the Wage Guarantee Fund.
The unfair dismissal, ie dismissal capricious, when an employer is unable to prove to a judge, taking into account the constitutional right to work on one hand and the protection effective judicial or other "before the authorities in the case of collective redundancies, the need to write a job, or an infringement of the employee may be grounds for dismissal comes at a cost of 45 days salary per year worked , with a maximum of 42 months. We can not forget that this cost exists only if the employer, as usual, decides to pursue its claim for worker's disregard, even though a judge has determined that there is no reason to terminate the contract. If there is no breach of contract by the worker, and there is no economic, technical, organizational or production, why does he insist an employer to pay for firing the worker or workers?. What should an employer's ban could dismiss an employee without cause, because in the background, allowing unfair dismissal compensation, what we are really doing is putting a price on the injustice and, in many cases, attacking fundamental rights.
What famous seeks single contract then? On the one hand the lowering of the cost of dismissal, but mainly to increase the feeling of insecurity among workers. Anyone knows that his right to work is protected by the cost that the employer is getting rid of him, and that if low cost, its security as well, making you more vulnerable and submissive. That is the real intention behind this proposal to prevent the arbitrary and capricious decisions of employers are subject to judicial control. This is a direct attack on democracy in enterprises where the conduct of the above do not require justification and below is limited to obeying beyond what is ethically acceptable and, until now, legally established. So, what is sought by cheapening the cost of dismissal?, Is the creation of more jobs?, That is absurd as it would only makes it easier to destroy the stable employment even more expensive.
is said that if the dismissal was cheaper not to be resorted to both the timing, but if the idea is to abuse this type of contract, the problem is quite different because the Workers' Statute is clear in choosing on permanent contracts and permitting, where there are reasons that justify the use of temporary contracts. In Spain the main reason for the rapid destruction of employment remains temporary contracts. If employers rely on job insecurity, whether good cause exists or not, what needs to be addressed is the need to create mechanisms to correct this course of action, because it violates both the spirit and the letter of the law. Lower the cost of dismissal would not only be unfair, but reward the failure of the rule rather than pursue it. Therefore, the road to avoid the abuse of temporary contracts, which is directly responsible for maintaining a high segmentation of our market and represents one of the main brake to change the production model, involves improving the control mechanisms, both in the registration of contracts SPEE (Public Employment Service) or SERVEF in the País Valencià, and improve the provision, the Inspectorate of Labour and Social Security.
Again the saviors of the country are committed to measures that have nothing to do with the general interest, they say we need to change the production model and prescribe more precarious and cheaper labor, disposable, so that countries are moving away from of our environment. A change in the production model involves more commitment from all jobs with higher added value, commitment to training, R & D + i, productive sectors and service quality, and there has not been reached by that shortcut, which leads to another cliff. Ignore them would let go once again, an opportunity to start doing things differently, you can not build a society of the twenty-first century on a labor market nineteenth century, who try, not going to allow.
the January 1, 2011, and considering that most legislators took the time to legislate the extension of a right can be exercised only after the passage of a long period of time (legislated today, with the corresponding media coverage, so that the law comes into force in a long morning.) 
the January 1, 2011, and considering that most legislators took the time to legislate the extension of a right can be exercised only after the passage of a long period of time (legislated today, with the corresponding media coverage, so that the law comes into force in a long morning.) 
