As much as you repeat a lie, this is still that, a lie. And this is what happens with the false comparison that is related to selling Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska, and that It is still a salary climb. Because equating is synonymous with “matching” and just looking at a payroll from a national police or a civil guard and comparing it with that of a Mosso or Ertzaina to see that they are far from being the same or even similar. If at the end of 2024 the salary difference with the regional police could reach 8,251 euros a year, now, after the last agreement between the majority of the Ertzaintza and the Basque Executive unions, that gap will increase After being agreed 4,200 euros more a year For each agent.
And not only is seen in payrolls, that difference with the Mossos d’Esquadra and the Ertzaintza is also observed in retirement, in the Recognition as risk professionalsin accessories or the payment of “extras”, among others. An arbitrariness that the Executive has decided to cover with reports from the State Council that an average salary increase of 38.41% endorses for state security forces and bodies. Moreover, they emphasize that this increase is 21.12% more than the one experienced by the rest of the officials of the General State Administration.
In this way, Marlaska justified the State’s law appeal against the judgment of the National Court of 2023, which forced him to comply with the comparison and renegotiate with the unions and associations of the National Police and the Civil Guard. Because, in the opinion of the Interior Minister, the agreement signed in 2018 is considered and completed. Needless to say, it is not true and that, today, there are still serious breaches on paper. The three most flagrants are: The re -entry of second activity agents to active duty; a external auditing The salary difference between police and civil guards with Mossos and Ertzainas, for example; as well as the development of A remuneration law to avoid inequalities between the State Security Forces and Bodies.
Agents in second activity and compensation law
Humiliating after humiliation, the Executive has evading compliance with that agreement signed in 2018, with clear deficiencies. The National Court’s ruling appealed by Marlaska emphasized encourage the re -entry of agents in second activity and reserve to active duty.
On the other hand, the judgment of the Hearing also refers to the eighth clause of the agreement, which forced the Ministry of Interior to promote the legislative measures that were necessary to ensure that in the future it could not be produced a salary dysfunction between police officers performing the same functions. Standard that nothing is known, except for its mention in a non -law proposal registered in the Congress of Deputies by the PP.
Two breaches that, in the opinion of the State Advocacy, are not. So much so that in their brief they come to point out that The third clause of that agreement is “manifestly illegal” and that the eighth is “contrary to the legal system.” Therefore, in their appeal they state that The Interior Ministry “has more than fulfilled its obligations As far as good negotiating faith, derived from the agreement (in its non -illegal part). “
Negative to deliver and repeat audits
Another point of the agreement that has not been fulfilled is that of the audits. An issue loaded with controversy, since just one year after the agreement, police unions and civil guards demanded, demanded to see those audits, since they did not agree with the amount destined to cover the third and last stretch of the equalization: 807 million. In fact, not even the hired consultant Ernest & Young seemed to agree … until they changed their minds.
To silence the criticisms of the agents, Marlaska gave them a CD with data that justified that the agreed figure was correct, so it ended the comparison agreement. There is plenty of saying that those 807 million were not only enough, but were far from the necessary amount for a “real comparison” with the regional police. But the desire to hide those reports was what gave the alarm. In that CD there was a “conclusions” section where Ernest & Young said that “In his opinion, the aforementioned 807 million figure is insufficient to achieve remuneration comparison. “
It must be remembered that this auditor made a report prior to the one presented by Grande-Marlaska, who was dismissed by interior alleging that They had not taken into account the equalization “placed on” and did not adjust to the sheet of technical prescriptions. An explanation that did not convince the agents, who accused the minister of presenting an “letter audit.” In that report, the consultant explained that “there are certain concepts that were taken into consideration in the salary mass of the Civil Guard and the National Police compared to that corresponding to the Mossos d’Esquadra that, if not taking into account, would have thrown a higher amount.”
However, In his second report he changed completely. In this second document, the external consultant assured that the 807 million agreed between the signatory parties of the agreement were “the total and absolute framework” of which the audit had to leave. Thus, it certified that this amount was “correct” and “adjusted” to the existing remuneration reality.
No decent retirement or risk profession
And although the list of breaches pleases endless, the last controversy runs on account of the term “Risk profession”. In the opinion of the head of Interior, that term does not exist as such, that is, it is not a “legal term” that can be applied to national police, civil or military guards. “From a legal point this concept does not exist, “Marlaska himself has manifested, which He had no qualms about “Lying” stating that “danger is already considered in other concepts such as productivity.” Needless to say, agents have already denounced that in their payrolls there is no compensation for that concept.
A game of trileros, the one held by the Minister of the Interior with the agents, which does not hold. Since although there is no official list of risk professions, as ensuring sources from the Ministry of Labor, There are professions classified as “risk”among which are neither the members of the National Police, the Civil Guard, nor the Armed Forces, prison officials or customs agents. This is stipulated by Law 31/1995 on Occupational Risk Prevention in its section 3.2.
However, this article also determines that “this law will inspire the specific regulations issued to regulate the protection of the safety and health of workers who provide their services in the indicated activities.” That is, there is the possibility of applying specific rules to include these agents within the risk professions, which would allow them benefit from the “reducing coefficient” and retire in advance, at 59charging one hundred percent of your pension. And this is the key.