No presenta resumen

The author analyzes the different innovations that have been taking place in the labor process. He evaluates the practices and experiences implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and their compatibility with the model provided for by the New Labor Procedure Law. The author addresses the recent reform of labor appeals before the Supreme Court and identifies problems in the decisions of the Supreme Court to establish procedural rules through plenary agreements.

The author begins the study by making a balance on the results of the implementation of the New Labor Procedural Law during its first years of enforcement. Then, the author analyzes the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on labor lawsuits and the compatibility of the practices and experiences developed in response to it with the principles and content of our labor procedural model. Finally, the author proposes the reforms that should be considered in a forthcoming legislative modification of the law on the matter.

La crisis del Sistema de Justicia es una situación que atañe a la sociedad toda, en tanto es factible que todas las personas sean partícipes de procesos judiciales dirigidos a dilucidar conflictos de intereses o solucionar controversias jurídicas, más aun cuando las propias decisiones del Gobierno y los actos del Parlamento se encuentran sujetos a control jurisdiccional. Sin duda son múltiples y complejas las causas de esta crisis institucional y los distintos actores sociales han formulado una variedad de propuestas y líneas de acción para afrontarla. Particularmente, estimamos que uno de los factores más importantes a tomarse en cuenta es el relacionado a los recursos humanos del Poder Judicial, y en específico, a los jueces, los que como directores del proceso, expresan las decisiones a través de las cuales se resuelven los conflictos económicos y jurídicos sometidos a su...

From the analysis of the Supreme Court’s jurisdictional plenums on civil liability regarding the failure to comply with labor obligations, we evaluate the transcendence of the rules issued in them and whether they have become binding criteria for the lower level labor justice bodies. The conclusion is that such rules do not constitute binding precedents or consolidated statements generally observed by the judicial bodies of the field. Their content, in most cases, restate legal precepts and do not address essential aspects of the matter. On occasion, they have sought to modify legislation by distorting substantive and procedural institutions. Therefore, it is required that the Supreme Court issue precedents which, based on their pertinence and argument solidity, favor the predictability of the judicial decisions of the matter.