Portal de Lorca

www.portaldelorca.com

• Home
• Business
• Hotels
• Restaurants
• News
• Advertisement

The municipal groups of PSOE and IU in the City of Lorca announce that they will exhaust all administrative and legal channels to annul the basis of the calls for three selective processes opened by LIMUSA, after detecting manifest irregularities that affect the principles of equality, Access and free competition to public employment.

Both formations use these channels once they have transmitted this "clamorous citizen concern" directly to the Mayor "without having done anything to remedy it"

The spokesmen of the municipal groups of the PSOE and IU-Greens in the City of Lorca, Diego José Mateos and Pedro Sosa, respectively, have demanded this morning the Mayor of Lorca the annulment of the grounds for convening three selective processes opened by the company Municipal cleaning LIMUSA, for being "manifestly illegal."

In turn, they have requested that it be the Department of Internal Regime, Economy, Finance and LIMUSA who assumes the responsibility of elaborating new bases "that, yes yes, they comply with the applicable regulations in this regard".

The municipal groups of the PSOE and IU resort to this route once, they claim, have exhausted all political and institutional ways to get the Mayor and the rest of the PP government team in the City of Lorca "the indignation and public concern "Before the" evident inequality "that is at the time of being able to accede to a selective process in the municipal company LIMUSA".

Among the irregularities detected, the spokespersons of both groups have denounced the situation that "LIMUSA employees are directly refusing to register applications for candidates, thus failing to grant access and registration to public employment applications" .

A situation that in his opinion, it is an "overstatement in their functions, since they are not who to decide that an applicant meets or not with any of the requirements of the call."

In this sense, and as they claim "all applications must be duly registered and then the selective body is who should assess the concurrence of the requirements in each and every applicant, and publish a list of admitted and excluded, Giving a period to the latter to remedy any possible deficiency. "

Mateos and Sosa have also denounced the violation in these bases of the rights of access to public employment, as well as that of free competition in the selective processes.

Another of the situations that affect the "manifest illegality" of these processes attends to the requirements in the accesses to these calls.

As stated in these rules, candidates are required as a condition "should be in a situation of unemployment of at least 12 months uninterrupted at the time of publication of the call, in addition to accrediting it through the INEM."

According to these policy makers, this requirement "is manifestly exclusionary and limiting access", and therefore "attacks the constitutional principle of equal access to public employment."

In addition, both spokespersons say, "the fact is that we do not know under what criterion or due to what reasons, a person is discriminated against because of his or her personal situation, regardless of whether it is best for the development of a job".

Both formations insist that criteria such as the socio-economic or socio-economic situation of the aspirants, of course, should be taken into account in the assessment, but should not be considered as an exclusionary criterion.

Another violation that these bases make on the principles of equality and access and free competition has to do with the limitation that are made so that the aspirants can not appear to more than one place when there are several called.

Nor is it stated in these calls that the maximum score can be obtained by applicants in any of the phases at the time to overcome these selective processes.

"Situations that affect the manifest arbitrariness that exists when designing and convening these selective processes".

Reasons more than enough for Diego José Mateos and Pedro Sosa insist on the serious violation of these principles as they are calls that have to do with a 100% municipal company such as LIMUSA.

They assert that "it is inconceivable that a public company plans the shadow of suspicion or lack of transparency around them."

For all these reasons, they again claim the annulment of these processes and the elaboration of new bases "that, yes yes, comply with the applicable regulations in this regard".

Source: PSOE Lorca