Sisnero CSJN Ruling: Gender Discrimination & Evidentiary Burden in Hiring
In 'Sisnero, Mirtha v. Taldelva S.R.L.' (May 20, 2014), the Supreme Court established dynamic burden of proof rules in gender discrimination and employment access cases.
Apply the Fallo Sisnero CSJN precedent to your claim?
Consult Lead Attorney Dr. Guillermo Conti on a pure contingency fee basis:
Essential Conceptual Distinctions
- Binding Doctrine of Fallo Sisnero CSJN: Mandatory Supreme Court / CNAT case law.
- Zero Court Filing Fees: Full statutory exemption under Article 20 LCT.
- Pure Contingency Fees: We get paid only upon successful financial recovery.
1. Landmark Holding & Dynamic Burden of Proof
The Supreme Court ruled that when an employee establishes prima facie indicators of discriminatory exclusion (e.g., systematic refusal to hire women bus drivers), the burden shifts to the employer to prove objective, non-discriminatory grounds.
2. Robust Enforcement & Moral Damages
This ruling decisively facilitates discrimination claims based on gender, pregnancy, or medical leave, authorizing court orders to cease discriminatory practices and award substantial moral damages.
Frequently Asked Questions on the Ruling
How is workplace discrimination proven without written proof?
Establishing reasonable indicators shifts the burden to the employer to justify its actions with objective evidence.
What compensation is awarded for discriminatory dismissal?
Aggravated statutory indemnity (13 monthly wages) plus independent moral damages and backpay.
Does it apply to career promotions?
Yes. It covers job hiring, wage parity, and promotional advancement.