The Central Sindical Independiente y de Funcionarios (CSIF) has taken legal action against the Gálvez City Council, alleging a significant breach of Law 20/2021, which mandates the stabilization of temporary positions held prior to 2016. The lawsuit, announced on March 28, 2025, highlights the Council's failure to include at least 17 essential positions in its public employment offer, raising concerns about labor rights and compliance with national regulations.
According to CSIF, the excluded roles encompass a diverse range of services crucial to the community, such as one librarian, three cleaning staff, three lifeguard assistants, one receptionist-ticket clerk, three lifeguards for a heated pool, two sports monitors, one swimming instructor, two tennis instructors, and one gymnastics instructor for seniors. Additionally, the union points out that an unspecified number of general service workers, hired through various employment plans, are also affected by this oversight.
The union's grievance stems from the City Council's decision to stabilize only 20 positions thus far. Sixteen of these were formalized through a plenary agreement in May 2022, which CSIF claims was approved without proper negotiation with the unions, including CSIF itself, which is the most representative union in Gálvez. The remaining four positions were stabilized during a negotiation meeting in July 2024.
CSIF has criticized the City Council for its lack of transparency regarding how many temporary positions have been filled in permanent roles. They argue that this practice constitutes an "abuse of temporality" and undermines the stability that the law aims to provide. The union insists that the City Council has ignored multiple requests to include the 17 missing positions and to engage in negotiations with the unions, further complicating the situation.
Law 20/2021, enacted on December 28, 2021, was designed to address the urgent need for employment stability in the public sector by requiring the regularization of temporary jobs held for over eight years. CSIF asserts that the Gálvez City Council has failed to comply with this mandate, which is intended to protect workers' rights and ensure fair employment practices.
In its official statement, CSIF expressed deep concern over what it describes as an "institutional blockade" that prioritizes temporary hiring over job stability, even in essential services. The union's legal action seeks to compel the City Council to adhere to the law and uphold the labor rights of the affected workers.
The situation has sparked a broader conversation about employment practices within local governments, particularly regarding the treatment of temporary staff. Critics argue that the ongoing reliance on temporary contracts not only undermines job security but also affects the quality of services provided to the community.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the implications for both the Gálvez City Council and its employees remain to be seen. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how similar disputes are handled across the region, potentially influencing policies aimed at stabilizing public employment.
In summary, CSIF's legal challenge against the Gálvez City Council underscores the ongoing struggle for labor rights and the need for compliance with national laws aimed at ensuring job security for public sector workers. With the union's commitment to advocating for these rights, the case is poised to draw significant attention as it progresses through the judicial system.
