A mobile phone message sent via WhatsApp serves as decisive legal proof in a labor dispute, confirming a pregnant employee’s notification and upholding her aggravated severance indemnity. The Salta Labor Appeals Court issued the ruling under Sala I, Expediente SL1-7740/20, rejecting an employer’s appeal regarding a service station bar worker’s dismissal.
WhatsApp Pregnancy Notice Verified by Digital Forensics
The legal conflict centered on whether an informal digital message satisfies statutory notice requirements for pregnancy protection under labor law. Defense attorneys argued that the communication failed because the employee did not send a formal labor telegram. Judges rejected that defense, establishing that actual employer awareness supersedes rigid formatting rules when the message reaches management hierarchy.
A forensic computer analysis authenticated the chat logs, confirming that the digital conversations remained unaltered and arrived prior to the termination date. The court connected this timeline with the lack of any non-pregnancy-related justification for the firing. Consequently, the judicial panel upheld the aggravated severance compensation originally ordered in the initial ruling.
Court confirms full-time shifts and joint liability
Beyond the pregnancy notice, the litigation exposed significant discrepancies between official payroll records and daily operations inside the fuel station’s convenience area. Testimony established that the worker performed eight-hour daily shifts as a waitress despite the company registering her for only four hours. The appeals court preserved the salary adjustments and indemnification calculations based on a full-time schedule, noting that the defense failed to disprove the accumulated evidence.
The appellate decision also addressed corporate responsibility by maintaining joint liability for the fuel station operating company. Because the gastronomic service operated directly inside the property under affiliated operational guidelines, and the co-defendant firm failed to prove mandatory workplace oversight, the station business shared the financial penalty. Judges additionally applied aggravated interest rates for temerity and malice, citing the employer’s denial of documented facts throughout the legal process.
What evidence proved the pregnancy notification?
What exact evidence proved the pregnancy notification?
A digital forensics examination verified the authenticity of WhatsApp messages sent to managerial staff before the company executed the termination.
How much was the initial financial penalty set at?
The original court ruling established a baseline capital amount of $738,564.07, excluding updated interest and subsequent adjustments.
Which court handled the final appeal?
The Sala I of the Salta Labor Appeals Court reviewed the case under Expediente SL1-7740/20.
Keep reading