Keywords
classical concept
experimental character
probationary period‘s limits
STC 119/2014
July 6
STC 8/2015
January 22
labor reform
How to Cite
Abstract
The Constitutional Court (CC) has developed an identifiable and consistent doctrine on various aspects of the legal concept of probationary period. In this paper we analyze some of that jurisprudential path. Originally, the CC recognized the employer to withdraw from a contract during the probationary period was limited because it could not reach unconstitutional production results, not made for reasons beyond the work itself. This has apparently been relativized in two constitutional judgments, the STC 119/2014, July 6 and the STC 8/2015, January 22. The work has three parts: 1) the classical legal conception of the probationary period; 2) the issue of the duration of the probationary period in the 2012 Labor Reform; and 3) an analysis of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court on the duration of the probationary period.Copyright Notice:
Authors assign their intellectual property rights (copyright) to the Journal of Public Administration, once the article is accepted for publication. As a RAP policy, the author will not receive payment for published articles.
Once published, the author may have a digital version of the article for the exclusive use and publication of his/her personal page, making reference to the RAP. In case of wishing to publish in other media, the author must have the prior authorization of the RAP Editorial Board.
This authorization is granted so that the Journal of Public Administration may disseminate to the academic and scientific community, both locally and internationally, all works submitted and catalogued as publishable. By granting copyright to RAP, authors agree to the educational use policy set forth in Section 107, Title 17, of the U.S. Code.