The judicial battle that confronts Latam with his pilots

Can Latam Airlines Group and Transporte ‌Aéreo SA ‌(better known ​as Latam Express) be considered as a ⁢single employer if ‌they ‍share ⁢workers, use the same pilot ⁤ranks, have common ⁣operation manuals and documents, and if their centralized administration?

A question that would already have an answer, although two completely different lines. at the court of first instance.

In October,⁣ the Second Labor Court of Santiago issued a ruling in favor of the workers, concluding that ‌the two entities constitute the same economic unit.

The cases

Currently, there are two labor trials who seeks that justice declares ⁣Latam Airlines Group and ⁤Latam Express as a single employer. One ⁤of them with⁤ Air Transport Pilots Company ⁤Union SA (Siplach) and​ another by the Latam Airlines Group SA Pilots Company Union

In the case of the first union⁣ organization, the Second Labor Court of Santiago issued a ruling in October in favor of the workers.concluding that the two entities constitute the same economic​ unit for labor and pension purposes, ⁣which means that the unions established in the companies can, according to their statutes, any ⁢of the workers employed by the affiliate companies.

But, The court of first ⁤instance supported them and pointed out that “the interoperability of human resources, because the two companies establish, through a central power, a ladder that determines promotion and growth ⁤within the so-called. companyis no more than a unitary concept of the two companies”, says the ⁣ruling of the‍ Second Labor Court ‌of Santiago,⁢ which also says that the uniforms and credentials of the workers are ​identical for both companies, “reinforces the external perception that Latam Airlines and Transporte Aéreo SA are a single entity.”

In addition,​ the ruling adds, the companies’ reports confirm an integrated executive structure, in which senior management positions oversee the operations⁤ of both entities.which represents the integration⁢ of centralized administration that directly affects job functions.

The other ⁤error

In the case led by the Latam Airlines Group SA Pilot Company Union, in​ the First Labor Court in Santiago, the result was completely different,⁤ and here the court ‍of ⁢first instance rejected the existence of an “economic unit” between the firms.

Although there are evidentiary elements that‍ allow us to set out certain indications of cross-administration, the truth is that the evidentiary ​material of​ the plaintiffs is incomplete, fragmented, and concise, therefore – in the opinion of this ‌judge – it does ⁣not allow ⁢- to yet – to configure with these elements, ‍joint labor management and⁣ other ⁣components⁣ of the economic unitover⁢ specific aspects,” ​says the ruling from last August, which prompted the union organization to appeal for annulment.

However, it is now up to the Court of ⁣Appeal to ​rule, since both cases escalated to​ this final case.

Interview between Time.news ⁣Editor and Labor Law Expert

Editor: Good day, and welcome to this special edition of Time.news. Today, we have the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Simona Vargas, a labor ⁣law expert with​ extensive⁣ knowledge in employment relations within the airline ​industry. Dr. Vargas, thank⁣ you for joining us.

Dr. ⁢Vargas: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Editor: Let’s dive right in. There’s been quite a significant ruling from the ‍Second Labor Court of Santiago regarding Latam Airlines⁢ Group and Latam Express.‍ Can you clarify the court’s decision?

Dr. Vargas: Absolutely.‌ In October, the Second Labor Court ruled that ‍Latam Airlines Group and Latam⁢ Express should be considered a single employer. This ruling was based on the evidence that the two companies share workers, ‌use the same pilot ranks,⁣ and operate with common manuals and central administration.

Editor: That’s fascinating. So, what implications does ​this ruling have for the⁣ employees of both companies?

Dr.⁢ Vargas: The implications‍ are substantial.⁣ By ⁣recognizing both⁢ companies as a single‍ economic⁤ unit, the​ court’s decision ⁤ensures that union rights extend across both entities. This means that employees from either company can benefit from the collective agreements established by the unions, enabling them to potentially secure better ⁣working conditions and ‌benefits.

Editor: Speaking of unions, can you explain the ‍role of the unions involved in this case?

Dr. Vargas: Certainly. There are actually two unions—the Air Transport Pilots ⁣Company ⁢Union ⁤(Siplach) and the Latam Airlines ‌Group⁢ Pilots Company Union.⁣ Both unions brought forth the cases to the court, arguing that the employees should be treated ‌as part of⁣ the same organization, given the shared operational framework. The court’s ruling supports this claim and recognizes ‌the unions’ right to negotiate on behalf ⁣of all pilots across both companies.

Editor: That’s interesting! The court mentioned the “interoperability of human resources.”⁢ How does this concept influence the ruling?

Dr. ⁢Vargas: The‌ concept of interoperability is crucial here. It underscores how closely integrated the‍ human resources ⁣practices of ‌Latam Airlines Group and⁤ Latam Express‌ are. The ‍court indicated ​that because there’s a centralized power determining promotions and workforce management, it‍ reflects a⁤ unitary operation. This suggests that traditional boundaries between⁤ the‍ two organizations are blurred, ⁣which justifies their classification as a single employer for ⁣labor and ⁢pension purposes.

Editor: What challenges​ do you foresee as this ruling moves through the appeals process?

Dr. Vargas: The⁢ ruling is likely to face pushback ⁤from Latam Airlines Group, especially regarding⁢ the implications for its operational flexibility and financial responsibilities.⁣ The company⁢ might argue that recognizing them as one entity could​ impose additional⁤ costs ‌and legal obligations. There’s also the broader context of labor market dynamics and how this might ⁣set a precedent for other companies with similar operational structures.

Editor: With these legal battles, where do you think the‍ future of employee rights stands in the airline industry, especially in Latin America?

Dr. Vargas: This ruling could signify a shift towards stronger labor‌ protections in the region. If ⁣it stands, it may provide a framework for⁢ other unions and workers in various ⁣sectors to demand fairer treatment and recognition of their rights. ​It emphasizes ⁣the need for clarity in defining employer-employee‌ relationships in ‌increasingly ​complex corporate⁤ structures.

Editor: ⁢ Thank you, Dr. Vargas, ⁣for your insights​ on this pressing​ issue. It’s clear that⁤ the outcome of‍ these cases could have far-reaching effects on labor relations and employee rights not‌ just within the airline industry, but beyond.

Dr. Vargas: Thank ​you for the opportunity​ to ​discuss this important topic. It’s⁤ an ⁣evolving landscape, and I look forward to seeing how it ⁤unfolds.

Editor: ​ And that’s a ‍wrap for today’s ‍interview. Stay tuned for more updates on this story as it develops, and thank you for watching Time.news.

You may also like

Leave a Comment