They are not paying you: end the contract and be paid as if dismissed

The case, in five lines

What is brought

Action for compensated termination of the contract at the worker's request under article 50 ET, seeking the compensation set for unfair dismissal, with the unpaid wages claimed alongside it.

Before which court

The Social Section of the Tribunal de Instancia (the first-instance court), after conciliation before the public mediation, arbitration and conciliation body. It is the court that declares the termination, not you.

Deadline

The action has no special lapse period and falls under the one-year prescription of article 59.1 ET. Each unpaid month, by contrast, prescribes one year after it could have been claimed, so the debt falls away month by month.

Who can bring it

The worker while the contract is still alive. If the contract has already ended by another route, this action is no longer available and what remains is a claim for the money or a challenge to that termination.

Financial risk

If the judgment finds no serious breach, you remain at the company with the conflict open and no compensation. And if you leave the post before judgment without an interim measure, the company may treat the absence as a resignation.

Walking out and terminating under article 50 are not the same thing

Someone who resigns collects what they have earned and nothing more. Someone who obtains a judgment terminating the contract under article 50 ET is entitled, under its paragraph 2, to the compensation set for unfair dismissal. The difference between the two exits is the whole compensation, and it depends solely on a court declaring the termination instead of you deciding it one morning.

That is why the advice that opens this matter is always the same: do not leave yet. The law has not designed a mechanism where you go and then claim, but one where you sue and the court decides whether the employer's breach justifies breaking the contract with the consequences of an unfair dismissal.

The second consequence of that logic is financial. While the contract lives you remain registered and paying contributions, and the judgment that terminates it also opens the door to unemployment protection on the applicable terms. Slamming the door on the way out closes that road and usually undermines the claim for what you are owed as well.

Since 2025 unpaid wages have an objective test

Article 50.1.b) ET lists as just cause the failure to pay or continued delays in paying the agreed wage. In its current wording it adds a rule that previously had to be fought for case by case: there is a delay when the date set for payment is exceeded by fifteen days.

And it specifies when the cause arises: when the worker is owed, within a period of one year, three full monthly wages, even if not consecutive, or when there is delay in paying the wage over six months, even if not consecutive. They are two alternative thresholds, and crossing either of them is enough for the cause to be established.

The provision itself leaves the door open to other situations the judge or court may consider just cause. The thresholds are a floor, not a ceiling: someone who has not reached three monthly wages but suffers split, arbitrary payments always conditioned on their asking can still argue the breach through the general route.

Paragraph c) reaches far beyond wages

Article 50.1.c) ET accepts as just cause any other serious breach of the employer's obligations, except in cases of force majeure. It is an open clause, and through it come the failure to give real work, prolonged non-payment of social security contributions, systematic downgrading of duties or treatment that makes continuing to work unviable.

That same paragraph names one specific situation: the employer's refusal to restore the worker to their previous working conditions in the cases of articles 40 and 41, where a court has declared the transfer or the modification unjustified. Winning that earlier case and having the company ignore it is, in itself, ground for compensated termination.

Paragraph a) also covers substantial modifications carried out without respecting article 41 that undermine the worker's dignity. They are three separate doors, and the claim usually rests on more than one: documented non-payment as the backbone and the serious breach as reinforcement when the wage shortfall does not reach the thresholds.

You keep working while the case runs, with one exception

The law does not allow you to stop attending work on your own initiative before the court rules. Anyone who does risks the company treating the absence as walking off the job and losing the entire action, including the compensation they were after. It is the most expensive mistake in this matter and the commonest, because the situation is exhausting.

The exception is in article 79.7 LRJS. In cases where the article 50 ET action is brought and it is shown that the employer's conduct harms dignity or physical or moral integrity, may breach other fundamental rights, or has consequences so serious that continuing to work as before cannot be required, interim measures can be sought.

The measures that provision refers to in article 180.4 LRJS include suspending the relationship, releasing you from providing services, a change of post or workplace and the rearrangement or reduction of working time. And article 79.7 itself adds the essential point: they are granted with the employer's duty to pay contributions and wages maintained.

When the cause is unpaid wages, the hearing comes sooner

Article 103.5 LRJS extends to claims seeking termination on the ground in article 50.1.b) ET the reinforced regime of the preceding paragraph: the case is urgent and takes priority, the hearing must be listed within five days of the claim being admitted and judgment must be given within five days.

That regime has a strategic consequence. If your case fits paragraph b), the claim should say so from its heading and ground it in the thresholds of article 50.1.b), because the label decides the calendar. A matter resting only on paragraph c) follows the ordinary pace of the social jurisdiction.

Statutory timetables and real ones do not always match, but the priority shows. In a matter where the client has gone months without pay and is carrying a mortgage, gaining weeks on the calendar is not a procedural detail: it is the difference between holding on to judgment and having to take decisions that destroy the case.

The wage debt falls away month by month while you wait

Article 59.1 ET subjects to a one-year prescription those actions arising from the employment contract that have no special deadline. The article 50 action has none, so it does not lapse in twenty days as a dismissal does, but neither does it wait forever. Time works against you in two separate ways.

The first is the debt. Article 59.2 ET provides that where the action seeks financial payments, the one-year period runs from the day the action could have been brought. Each unpaid payslip therefore has its own clock, and the oldest ones drop out of the claim even though the conflict is still alive.

The second is tolerance. A breach silently accepted for years is harder to argue than one demanded in writing month after month. That is why, from day one, every delay is documented with a dated demand: not only to build evidence, but to record that you never consented to the situation.

How we run the case, step by step

1. 1

   Measuring the breach against the statutory thresholds

   We cross your payslips and bank statements against the agreed payment dates and count, over the last year, the full monthly wages owed and the months delayed by more than fifteen days. That count decides whether the case runs under paragraph b).

2. 2

   Demanding in writing and leaving a trail of every delay

   We prepare dated demands for each unpaid payslip. They interrupt prescription of the sums and, above all, they show that you did not consent to the situation for months, which is the first thing the company will argue.

3. 3

   Deciding whether to seek interim measures

   If the employer's conduct affects your dignity or integrity, or makes continuing to work as before unreasonable, we seek the measures of article 79.7 LRJS with wages and contributions maintained. Outside that route, you keep attending.

4. 4

   Conciliation and claim with the money added

   We bring the conciliation request and then the termination claim, adding the claim for the unpaid wages. We expressly invoke article 50.1.b) ET where it applies, to trigger the urgent and priority regime.

5. 5

   The hearing: proving non-payment with documents, not stories

   The case is won with payslips, statements and demands lined up in a table the court can read in a minute. The company's cash flow excuses do not release it from paying wages, and that is how we put it in cross-examination and closing.

6. 6

   Judgment, termination and payment

   A successful judgment terminates the contract and sets the unfair dismissal compensation plus the sums owed. If the company does not pay, we continue with enforcement and, where applicable, with the statutory guarantees available.

The law that applies

• Art. 50 ET. It lists the just causes for a worker to seek termination of the contract: substantial modifications made without respecting article 41 that undermine their dignity, failure to pay or continued delays in wages, and any other serious breach by the employer. In those cases it grants the compensation set for unfair dismissal. BOE-A-2015-11430
• Art. 50.1.b) ET. It objectifies non-payment: there is delay when the date set for paying wages is exceeded by fifteen days, and the cause arises when three full monthly wages are owed within a year, even if not consecutive, or there is delay in payment over six months, even if not consecutive, without prejudice to other situations the court may treat as just cause. BOE-A-2015-11430
• Art. 59 ET. It subjects to a one-year prescription those actions arising from the contract with no special deadline and specifies that, where financial payments are claimed, that year runs from the day the action could have been brought. Each unpaid month therefore has its own deadline. BOE-A-2015-11430
• Art. 79.7 LRJS. In article 50 ET termination cases where it is shown that the employer's conduct harms dignity or physical or moral integrity, may breach fundamental rights or has consequences making it unreasonable to continue working as before, it allows interim measures with the employer's duty to pay contributions and wages maintained. BOE-A-2011-15936
• Art. 180.4 LRJS. It lists the interim measures available in harassment and fundamental rights cases, to which article 79.7 refers: suspension of the relationship, release from providing services, a change of post or workplace, and the rearrangement or reduction of working time. BOE-A-2011-15936
• Art. 103.5 LRJS. It extends to claims seeking termination of the employment relationship on the ground in article 50.1.b) ET the reinforced regime of the preceding paragraph: an urgent, priority case, a hearing within five days of admission and judgment within five days. BOE-A-2011-15936

Each article checked against the consolidated text published in the BOE (the Spanish official gazette).

Frequently asked questions