Language of document :

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social de Madrid (Spain) lodged on 5 June 2018 – José Manuel Ortiz Mesonero v Unión Temporal de Empresas Luz Madrid Centro (comprising the commercial companies SICE, S.A., URBALUX, S.A., IMES.A.PI, S.A., EXTRALUX, S.A., and CITELUM IBÉRICA, S.A.)

(Case C-366/18)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: José Manuel Ortiz Mesonero

Defendant: Unión Temporal de Empresas Luz Madrid Centro (comprising the commercial companies SICE, S.A., URBALUX, S.A., IMES.A.PI, S.A., EXTRALUX, S.A., and CITELUM IBÉRICA, S.A.)

Question referred

Do Articles 8, 10 and 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, Article 23 and Article 33(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and Article 1 and Article 14(1) of Directive 2006/54, 1 all taken in conjunction with Directive 2010/18 2 implementing the Framework Agreement on parental leave, preclude a rule of national law such as Article 37(6) of the Workers’ Statute, which makes it a requirement that in order to exercise the right to reconcile family life and working life so as to be able to care directly for children or family members for whom they are responsible, workers must in all cases reduce their ordinary working hours, with a consequent proportional reduction in salary?

____________

1     Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ 2006 L 204, p. 23).

2     Council Directive 2010/18/EU of 8 March 2010 implementing the revised Framework Agreement on parental leave concluded by BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME, CEEP and ETUC and repealing Directive 96/34/EC (OJ 2010 L 68, p. 13).