TSJ Basque Country: disciplinary dismissal endorsed for unjustified absences and timekeeping manipulation.

 

The Superior Court of Justice of the Basque Country has confirmed the disciplinary dismissal of a bank branch director who habitually left her workplace to attend to personal matters —such as going to the hairdresser— and also manipulated the timekeeping records to cover up these absences.
The office was single-staffed: the absences not only affected internal organization, but also the operation and customer service, leading to clients finding the branch closed during service hours.

This case is not a "work anecdote". It is a ruling that companies must read as a serious warning about the legal relevance of two vectors that currently define labor compliance:

1) good faith as the cornerstone of the relationship
2) timekeeping as a piece of evidence

The business value of the trust principle

The court reminds that good faith is not a soft concept, nor a moral principle: it is a legal duty.
The breach of that trust, when objectively proven, justifies the termination of the employment relationship without compensation, even with long seniority.

And this is key for the company:
there is no obligation to maintain employment relationships that break essential trust for service provision.

Especially in positions where the worker has autonomy, access to security codes, or direct client representation.
In these roles, trust is not an "extra". It is infrastructure. If it fails, the whole system fails.

Time control: not only compliance, but legal defense

A very relevant contribution of this ruling is the role of timekeeping as evidence that strengthens the company's argumentation.

Timekeeping, when reliable, traceable, and non-manipulable, is an objective evidence.
And this objectivity is gold for a company that wants to support a disciplinary dismissal without exposure to a finding of unfairness.

Conversely, when control is weak, manipulable, or informal, the risk of the disciplinary process being overturned multiplies.

Therefore:

• timekeeping systems are not just a legal compliance formality

• they are part of the labor legal prevention strategy

Many companies have not yet made this shift in perspective.

What this ruling brings to management and HR

This ruling offers two important lessons for management:

A) serious and sustained facts that are proven can justify a direct termination without compensation
The company does not have to accept or tolerate core breaches.

B) anticipating labor risks is done with culture + systems
It is not enough to rely on personal maturity or seniority of the staff.
Trust is not a substitute for control. It is complementary.

The ruling reinforces a clear message for companies: good faith is a structural requirement, and well-designed timekeeping is a defense tool that makes a difference. When serious facts are proven objectively, the company can act, protect its operations, safeguard its reputation, and support disciplinary actions with guarantees.