Renewal of Contract: Can You Appeal if the Salary Increase is Low?

Renewal of Public Employment Contracts: Unveiling Important Issues

The negotiations for the renewal of contracts in the Public Sector continue, shedding light on various important themes.
With different strategies and methods, the various trade unions seek to protect the rights of personnel from both an economic and a psychophysical well-being perspective.

A common issue shared among almost all trade unions, regardless of the sector, is the inadequate amounts allocated for renewals in light of the cost of living increase due to inflation.
It’s an objective and precise data that leaves no room for disagreement.

Different Approaches to the Issue

Not all parties intend to address the problem in the same way, even though they largely agree on the need for a more significant allocation of resources.
Recently, however, some alternatives have emerged.
Some unions, such as those representing the Armed Forces, have hinted at a possible claim for compensation for damages resulting from the loss of purchasing power.

This raises a significant question: Can recourse be taken if the salary increase in the contract renewal is too low? Workers are promised compensations amounting to thousands of euros, seemingly to prevent discontent and dissatisfaction in case of a disadvantageous contract.
However, certainties in this regard are extremely limited.

Legal Recourse for Low Salary Increases

In our legal system, compensation is due to those who suffer harm due to another’s unlawful act, intentional or negligent, violating administrative, civil, or even criminal law.
In general, compensation is granted to those who have suffered an unjust prejudice attributable to another party’s liability.

The issue of unjust harm is addressed in article 2043 of the Civil Code, which specifically deals with compensation for damages resulting from unlawful acts.
The unfairness of the damage can concern the event itself, the action that, if committed, entitles to compensation.
This principle applies, for example, to crimes and their violation of victims’ rights and other potentially affected parties.
The definition of unjust harm can also directly concern the damaged assets, such as financial loss.

To request compensation from the State, one would have to presume its liability in an unlawful conduct, even if not intentional, with a causal link to the resulting harm.
Being a legal entity that doesn’t correspond to a natural person, the unlawful action must have been carried out through its channels, such as the public administration.

Compensation for Contractual Violations

Unlawful conduct does not necessarily imply criminal acts, in fact, most claims for compensation stem from contractual breaches, such as non-compliance or significant delays in meeting deadlines.
In simpler terms, the State would be required to compensate Armed Forces workers only if guilty of the purchasing power loss or negligent regarding a contractual obligation.

The State is not obligated to fully compensate for inflation and the consequent rise in living costs during contract renewals.
Therefore, attributing responsibility in this regard is challenging, especially if the alleged fault cannot be attributed to a specific intent.
Moreover, acknowledging state liability in terms of inflation would entail due compensation to any citizen.
Impractical, counterproductive, and devoid of any legal basis.

Conclusion: Limited Legal Grounds for Claims

In essence, it’s not possible to file a lawsuit against contract renewals seeking compensation for the loss of purchasing power.
Specifically, such compensation cannot be obtained even if requested.
Case law generally favors workers – regardless of the industry – in case of excessively low salaries, taking into account the cost of living for this assessment.

The responsibility for such matters falls on the employer, who is expected to boost salaries and potentially reimburse arrears.
However, there’s no requirement for this adjustment to mirror the inflation rate.
Regarding the recent union proposals, what is mentioned is not even a financial loss but an existential one.
Certainly stemming from an inadequate standard of living, the causal link to the contract renewal appears ambiguous.