A Coruña pizzeria closes two days amid high sick leave

Six out of eighteen staff on sick leave: A Coruña pizzeria closes two days a week

A hospitality owner in A Coruña claims to have eighteen employees, with six simultaneously on medical leave. According to his testimony, reported by La Voz de Galicia, he has begun closing on Tuesdays and Wednesdays to balance accounts. His account describes a venue that never used to close—“we never close the restaurant,” he says—and now reduces hours due to the impossibility of covering shifts. The story includes three specific cases: someone allegedly faking depression symptoms to get a one-month leave without seeing a specialist, a worker absent for eighteen months shortly after starting, and an employee suspended from work and pay for falsifying clock-in/out records who submitted an anxiety certificate a week later.

This case is not an isolated anecdote. It is the tip of a debate open for 683 days, pitting two incompatible narratives against each other: that of the small business owner crushed by absenteeism and that of the poorly paid worker using sick leave as their only escape valve. In the middle lies a data point rarely disputed: social security does not cover everything, and the employer pays part of the bill.

What companies actually pay when an employee takes sick leave

The most widespread belief—“social security pays for sick leave, so stop complaining”—is false in its initial phase. For common illness or non-work-related accidents, the first three days are borne by the worker; from day four to fifteen, the employer pays 60% of the regulatory base; from day sixteen, the mutual insurance company or INSS (National Social Security Institute) steps in, but the company continues paying wages via delegated payment and, crucially, keeps contributing social security for an employee who produces nothing. This last point tips the scale: according to calculations circulating in the debate, social security contributions for five workers on leave do not fall below €1,500 per month, and if replacements must be hired, another €1,500 in contributions adds to payroll costs. That same calculation raises the real cost of prolonged leave to around €7,000 for a gross salary of €2,000.

Some qualify this figure. It depends on the collective bargaining agreement. In A Coruña’s hospitality agreement, if a worker earns €3,000, they still receive €3,000 while on leave: €2,250 from the mutual insurer plus €750 from voluntary benefits covered by the company. If they earn €1,000, they receive €1,000: €750 from the mutual insurer and €250 from company supplements. These voluntary benefits, presented as social perks, are often the minimum many companies offer to retain staff.

33% of staff on leave: Is it the worker or the model failing?

With six out of eighteen employees on leave, the percentage approaches 33%. The immediate reaction is to suspect the worker. The opposite reaction is to suspect the employer. Both sides have ammunition.

Those pointing to labor abuse argue that anxiety and depression leaves do not come out of nowhere. One case described in the debate involves an office worker at a firm paying SMI (minimum wage), with poor sarracena and reluctantly granted vacations, where only one of seven people remains. “I developed severe anxiety,” he recounts. “Changing jobs, earning €400 more, and the problem disappeared.” The conclusion drawn is uncomfortable: if your job depresses you and sick leave pays nearly the same as your salary, taking leave is rational.

Those pointing to system abuse respond with another argument: some chain leaves for years, others grow accustomed to paid vacation periods, harming those who truly need them. Temporary disability spending has skyrocketed in a country where a large mass of workers earns SMI or slightly more, while managerial profiles rarely take leave. This data, provided by hospital directors, points to a correlation between precariousness and absenteeism that neither side wants to face directly.

Closing Tuesdays and Wednesdays: When business adjusts to absenteeism

The A Coruña hospitality owner has gone from never closing to closing two days a week for two weeks, unsure what next week will bring. His staff earns between €1,400 and €2,000 per month without reaching 40 hours a week, above the collective agreement, according to his own testimony. He also grants loans to employees when needed. This is his counter-argument to accusations of exploitation: “For anyone saying this happens because we exploit workers in hospitality, we pay above the agreement.”

The antiestéticar, he says, is hiring again only to have the new hire fail too. “I am terrified, afraid of having bad luck again, registering someone and having them fail within a week.” This is the small business owner’s trap: unable to compete on salary with multinationals, they compensate with flexibility and conditions above legal requirements, yet when absenteeism spikes, they lack a buffer to absorb it.

The shadow of public employment: 118,000 daily absences

The debate quickly jumps from the private to the public sector. According to cited data, 118,000 public employees miss work daily, 27% without medical leave. The comparison is inevitable: if absenteeism is a structural problem in the Spanish labor market, it is not exclusive to hospitality. And if it is tolerated in the public sector without anyone closing on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, the owner’s complaint loses force as an exceptional case.

Counterarguments are swift: public employees do not choose their bosses nor can they change companies as easily, and leave without a medical report simply does not exist in the private sector. The comparison, in reality, measures two different things.

Migrant labor and family businesses: Two models in tension

Part of the debate shifts to staff profiles. Some argue hospitality is only profitable when run by the owning family—mother in the kitchen, father at the bar, children serving tables—because control over money and effort is total. Others respond that this very model prevents professionalizing the sector and paying decent wages. Discussions about workers’ origins appear in various messages, but the figures provided do not support conclusions about nationality: only about conditions.

What clearly emerges is a pattern: businesses dependent on tight margins and rotating staff are most vulnerable to absenteeism, and least able to afford voluntary benefits or salaries that retain talent. A vicious cycle.

---

The A Coruña restaurant remains open. It closes on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Next week, it is unknown if it can stay open. At the bottom of the debate lies a fact no one has refuted: in Spain, the cost of sick leave is not paid solely by social security. It is also paid by the employer, sometimes with two days of shutters down.