Abstract
The judgment of the Supreme Court of November 23, 2021, ROL No. 62.739-2020, “Torres Alcañiz con Buses Ahumada Limitada” analyzes the application of the grounds for dismissal of article 160 No. 3 of the Labor Code. It looks at the termination of the employment contract for a worker’s non-attendance to work while on medical leave. We analyze the sentence, confronting it with similar jurisprudence, to determine the real meaning and scope of a license as an instrument justifying the worker’s absence, its requirements, and the opportunity to present it, distinguishing the rights it grants according to its current regulation.References
Gamonal C.S. y Caterina G.M. (2011). Manual del Contrato de Trabajo. Santiago, Chile: Legal Publishing Chile.
Irureta U.P. (2013). Las inasistencias al trabajo como causa de terminación del contrato. Revista de Derecho Universidad de Valdivia, 26(2), 39-65.
Irureta U.P. (2016). La falta injustificada o sin aviso previo del trabajador que perturba gravemente la marcha de la empresa. Revista de Derecho Universidad de Valdivia, 29(1), 77-89.
Pierry V.L. (2018). Derecho individual del trabajo. Santiago. Chile: DER Ediciones Limitada.
Rojas M.I. (2015). Derecho del trabajo. Derecho individual del trabajo. Santiago, Chile: Legal Publishing Chile.
The authors of the articles published in the Digital Legal Magazine UANDES agree on the terms of publication, distribution, preservation, and content use contemplated in the licence:
This work is under a license of Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional.