Law 20/2021 before the Constitutional Court: what risk do stabilized public employment positions face

Key data

The public employment stabilization processes that were launched under the Law 20/2021, of December 28, are now under the scrutiny of the Constitutional Court. The Plenary has admitted to proceedings constitutional question no. 5551-2026, raised by the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha, which opens a scenario of first-order legal uncertainty for public administrations and employees throughout Spain.

The question that the Constitutional Court must answer is direct: can the additional provisions sixth and eighth of Law 20/2021 allow temporary staff to consolidate their position without an open competitive examination process, without violating the constitutional right of all citizens to access public service on equal terms?

What does this regulation establish?

Law 20/2021 was created with the objective of reducing the high rate of temporary employment in Spanish public service. To achieve this, its additional provisions sixth and eighth articulated stabilization processes that, in practice, allowed temporary employees to consolidate their position through procedures that did not require a completely open competitive examination to all citizens.

The Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha considers that these mechanisms could violate two constitutional provisions:

• Article 23.2 of the Spanish Constitution: guarantees the right of citizens to access public functions and positions on equal terms, with the requirements established by law.
• Article 149.1.18 of the Spanish Constitution: reserves to the State the exclusive competence to establish the bases of the statutory regime of civil servants, which may have been affected by the way the law regulated these processes.

By admitting the question to proceedings, the Constitutional Court has not yet declared unconstitutionality: it has simply considered that the doubt has sufficient legal foundation to be examined in depth. The parties to the original proceedings have 15 days to appear before the Constitutional Court.

Economic and operational impact

The uncertainty generated by this admission to proceedings has immediate operational consequences and potential medium-term effects:

• Ongoing processes paralyzed or suspended: administrations that are still executing stabilization calls under the questioned provisions face a legal risk situation. Continuing could mean consolidating positions that the Constitutional Court later declares void.
• Already stabilized positions at risk: if the Constitutional Court declares unconstitutionality, it could affect thousands of already consolidated positions, which would generate litigation, claims, and the need to reopen selective processes.
• Replacement cost: annulling stabilizations means repeating open selective processes, with the economic and administrative cost that this entails for administrations: calls, courts, human resources dedicated and possible compensation.
• Impact on candidates: those who were excluded from positions covered through direct stabilization could claim their right to participate in new open processes, increasing litigation.

Who does it affect?

• Temporary public employees who have already consolidated their position through the stabilization processes of Law 20/2021.
• Temporary public employees who are in the process of stabilization and have not yet obtained a permanent position.
• Candidates and external applicants who could not compete on equal terms for positions covered by direct stabilization.
• Public administrations (municipalities, provincial councils, autonomous communities, state bodies) that have called or executed stabilization processes under the additional provisions sixth and eighth.
• HR managers and human resources directors of public sector entities that must manage the current legal uncertainty.
• Legal advisors and lawyers of public administrations that must assess the risk of ongoing processes.

Practical example

A medium-sized municipality called in 2023, under the additional provision eighth of Law 20/2021, a stabilization process for 40 administrative assistant positions. The process was resolved through a merit competition, without an open examination phase, and the 40 positions were awarded to temporary staff already working in the entity.

Now, with the constitutional question admitted to proceedings, that municipality faces three possible scenarios:

1. The Constitutional Court dismisses the question: the positions remain firm and the process was valid. No consequences.
2. The Constitutional Court declares unconstitutionality with limited effects: it could respect already consolidated situations but prevent similar new processes.
3. The Constitutional Court declares unconstitutionality with full effects: the 40 awarded positions would be in a state of nullity, forcing the process to be repeated in an open manner and with an examination phase, with the consequent economic, administrative and human cost.

This scenario is replicated in hundreds of administrations throughout Spain that have used the same stabilization mechanisms.

What should administrations and affected parties do now?

1. Identify stabilization processes in progress that are based on the additional provisions sixth and eighth of Law 20/2021, and assess what stage they are in before continuing.
2. Consult with the legal department whether it is advisable to cautiously suspend unresolved calls until the Constitutional Court rules, to avoid consolidating situations that may later be declared void.
3. Appear before the Constitutional Court if you are a party to the original proceedings, within 15 days of admission to proceedings, to defend the interests of the administration or affected employees.
4. Document and file all files of the already resolved stabilization processes, to be able to prove the legality of the procedure followed in case of future challenge.
5. Inform affected employees about the situation of legal uncertainty, without generating unnecessary alarm, but with transparency about possible scenarios.
6. Monitor the Constitutional Court's ruling: the final decision will determine whether stabilized positions are firm or whether processes must be repeated. Monitoring the progress of the proceedings is key to anticipating personnel management decisions.

Official source

Consult complete regulation in official source

Notice: This article is merely informative in nature and does not constitute legal advice. For specific decisions, consult a qualified professional. Source: https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2026-20001