Can your company reduce remote-work days? What Spain’s Supreme Court says
If the remote-work percentage is set out in an individual agreement, it can only be changed with each person’s written consent.
Neither organizational reasons nor an agreement with employee representatives can replace it.
Many companies are rethinking their hybrid model and asking for more office presence. Spain’s Supreme Court has just made clear how far they can go: a general return-to-office policy is not enough to change what each person has agreed in their individual remote-work agreement.
The case: from 100% to 75% without asking
The ruling resolves a collective dispute at the RACC group. The company had been signing individual agreements allowing its employees with disabilities to work remotely 100% of the time, and decided to lower that maximum to 75%.
- July 2022The company starts signing 100% remote-work agreements with employees with a recognized disability.
- April 2023A collective agreement reached in conciliation before the National High Court (Audiencia Nacional) keeps that policy in place until 31 December 2024.
- October 2024The company tells the works council verbally that from January the maximum will be 75%.
- January 2025The reduction is applied to 27 people. Seven of them had asked to keep 100%.
- July 2026The Supreme Court declares the reduction void for those who did not give their consent.
What the law says
The key lies in Law 10/2021 on remote work. Its article 8.1 is very specific about how an agreement that has already been signed can be changed:
Any modification of the conditions set out in the remote-work agreement, including the percentage of on-site work, must be agreed between the company and the employee and put in writing before it is applied.
Law 10/2021 of 9 July on remote work, article 8.1 (courtesy translation)Employee representatives only have to be informed of the change. They do not negotiate on behalf of each individual.
What the Supreme Court clarifies
The National High Court had annulled the measure, treating it as a substantial collective modification made without a consultation period. The Supreme Court corrects that reasoning: remote work has its own law, which applies over and above article 41 of the Workers’ Statute. And that law is more demanding, not less.
The remote-work agreement is part of each worker’s individual and personal entitlements and is not available for collective disposal.
STS 608/2026, of 1 July, Social Chamber (appeal 131/2025) — courtesy translationThat is why the ruling does not annul the reduction for everyone. It declares it void only for those who did not accept it. Anyone who signed the change has a valid one. The rule works the same regardless of how many people are affected.
Modifying is not the same as reverting
The ruling distinguishes two concepts that are often confused in practice:
Reversibility
Cancels the remote-work agreement and the person returns to on-site work. It is only possible if they started out working on-site, and it is exercised on the terms set by the collective agreement or, failing that, by the agreement itself.
Modification
Changes the terms of the agreement, for example the percentage of remote days. It can never be unilateral: it always requires a new individual written agreement.
What if there is a collective agreement or policy?
The Supreme Court also explains what happens when remote work does not depend solely on individual agreements:
| Situation | How it can be changed |
|---|---|
| Only individual agreements exist | Individual written agreement with each person, in accordance with Law 10/2021. |
| Statutory collective agreement in force that regulates remote work | Only through the opt-out of the collective agreement (article 82.3 of the Workers’ Statute). |
| Non-statutory collective agreement or company policy with collective effects | With proven grounds and following the procedure in article 41 of the Workers’ Statute, including a consultation period. |
Even in those cases, no collective pact can allow the company to impose conditions less favorable than the law permits, or to decide for the person about their own agreement. In the RACC case, the collective agreement had expired in December 2024, so only the individual agreements remained.
What to do before changing your hybrid model
- Review what each person has agreed. The on-site percentage in each remote-work agreement is the starting point.
- Check whether a collective agreement or policy is in force. It determines which procedure you have to follow.
- Distinguish between reverting and modifying. And review what the collective agreement and the individual agreement say about reversibility.
- Obtain written consent before applying the change. A generic email to the whole workforce is not an individual agreement.
- Inform employee representatives of the modifications agreed.
Frequently asked questions
Can I require my workforce to come back to the office more days?
If the remote-work days are set in an individual agreement, not without each person’s written consent.
What if I negotiate the change with the works council?
When only individual agreements exist, a deal with the works council does not replace each employee’s acceptance. The council must be informed, but it does not decide for them.
What happens if part of the workforce accepts and part doesn’t?
The change is valid for those who accepted it and not for those who rejected it. That is how the Supreme Court resolved this case.
Does this apply only to people with disabilities?
No. The case involved that group, but the criterion is based on Law 10/2021 and applies to any individual remote-work agreement.
Official sources
- Judgment of the Supreme Court, Social Chamber, 608/2026, of 1 July (appeal 131/2025)
- Law 10/2021 of 9 July on remote work