Daring to care without giving up work and without intruding on family privacy: mission impossible?

Commentary on the Judgment of the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands/Las Palmas of 18 January 2024 (appeal 1134/2023)

Abstract

Resolution with gender and childhood perspectives, the right to care for a worker, assigned to rotating shifts (art. 34.8 of the ET). Compliance with the principle of due diligence that obliges the judiciary to remove obstacles (procedural and material) preventing the achievement of substantial equality, in harmony with the mandate of art. 9.2 in relation to art. 1.1 and 14 of the EC. The employer gave abstract, unproven organizational reasons. In the oral trial, evidence was given by detectives hired by the company to follow up on the plaintiff’s relatives. This evidence was not challenged either in the instance or in the petition. Compensation for moral damage (5,000 euros). The defendant was able to exonerate herself by provisionally complying with the request (art. 139.1 LRJS).