Introduction
The Labor Inspection Court of the National Superintendence of Labor Inspection (SUNAFIL) issued Resolution No. 405-2024-SUNAFIL/TFL-First Chamber, which resolves the appeal for review filed by Banco BBVA Peru. This appeal was filed in response to an economic sanction imposed for not renewing the contract of a pregnant worker, an infraction considered as “very serious” in the framework of labor relations.
Background of the case
The case originated with an inspection order issued by the Intendencia Regional del Cusco, which sought to verify compliance with social and labor regulations. During the investigation, it was found that Banco BBVA Peru did not renew the contract of a pregnant worker, which, according to the respective authority, contravened Article 6 of Law No. 30709. This law prohibits the dismissal or non-renewal of contracts for reasons related to pregnancy or breastfeeding.
The process culminated with the issuance of Sanction Sub-Intendency Resolution No. 631-2022-SUNAFIL/IRE CUSCO-SISA, which imposed a fine of S/ 346,698.00 to Banco BBVA Perú.
Arguments of the appeal for review
BBVA Peru argued in its appeal for review that the non-renewal of the contract was not related to the employee’s pregnancy, but to objective reasons, such as poor performance and customer complaints. They also pointed out that the worker was reinstated in her job by court order, which remedied any alleged infringement.
The bank’s main points of defense included:
- Causal Nexus: The non-renewal of the contract was not linked to the pregnancy, as the contract was renewed during the state of gestation in May 2021.
- Substantiation: The worker was reinstated in her position through a court ruling, which, according to the bank, remedied the breach.
- Violation of the principle of typicality: They argued that the sanctioned infraction does not comply with Law No. 30709, whose main purpose is to prohibit discrimination in remuneration, not specifically protection during pregnancy.
Implications of the ruling
The ruling underlines the importance of administrative acts, especially in sanctioning procedures. It also highlights that the reinstatement of a female worker, by court order, may have an impact on the assessment of labor violations related to protection during pregnancy.
The case also makes it clear that penalties for labor infractions related to protection during pregnancy may have an impact on the assessment of labor infractions related to pregnancy protection.