Court Annuls Government Civil Servant Reclassifications Over Procedural Failures

The Batllia has annulled the government's 2023-2024 workplace reclassification process for general administration civil servants, citing multiple procedural failures by the Public Function department, in a ruling that the administration has not appealed.

The court ordered a fresh evaluation of the challenger's position, following legal procedures and due process. It faulted officials for approving reclassifications without essential details, such as PwC's detailed valuation reports and scoring under its STRATA methodology—a system the executive still backs despite admitting limited grasp of its criteria at the time. Judges highlighted a "deficit of control" over an exercise impacting civil servants' rights, noting the government lacked access to commissioned materials and even denied staff requests for assessment data, citing consultancy "secrets."

The ruling rejected the administration's substitution of PwC for the required Technical and Organisation Committee, whose consultative input— including union representatives under outdated regulations—is legally mandatory. Officials argued the committee was unnecessary, but the Batllia deemed this omission alone grounds for nullity, as PwC overreached into public functions like valuations and decisions. Formal signatures on PwC outputs did not cure the defects, the court held, especially since post-lawsuit reports were commissioned outside the original contract.

This 20-page judgment undermines prior claims by government spokesperson Guillem Casal that a redo would produce identical outcomes, as it questions both procedure and methodology. It demands full motivation under the Administrative Code, absent here, leaving promotions unexplained—some granted, others denied without verifiable reasoning.

In response, Public Function plans to re-evaluate only the roughly 10 cases litigated in court, minimising the judicial setback while insisting internal protocols were followed. A new regulatory framework, under discussion with unions for about a month, is set for council of ministers approval this Wednesday or next. Despite court critiques on transparency, it will not annex valuation and scoring criteria, though details may be published separately beforehand. Sources defend external consultants for objectivity, claiming courts accessed needed information—a contention the rulings firmly refute. Uncertainty lingers for unlitigated staff, as the Batllia found clear procedural flaws in reviewed cases.