Having regard to the Auto of 18 May 2015, of the National Court of the Social Chamber, for which the judgment is rectified in Case 078/2015, given in cars No. 361/2014 and 64/2015 (accumulated) on the challenge of collective agreement,

And considering the following

Fact Background

First.

In the Official Gazette of the State of 29 May 2015, the resolution of this Directorate-General for Employment, of 13 May 2015, is published, in which it is ordered to register in the corresponding Register of collective agreements and agreements. The Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Court of Justice of the European Communities, of 30 April 2015, of 30 April 2015, on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, State collective agreement of the security companies for 2015 (convention code n. º 99004615011982).

Second.

According to the fact of the case of the Auto of 18 May 2015, referenced in the heading of this resolution, the legal representative of the union ELA-STV, dated May 8, 2015, filed written requesting the clarification of the judgment in his/her case in fact 4. º and in his failure. And the Chamber has agreed, in the operative part of that Auto, the clarification of the material error that has occurred in it.

Fundamentals of Law

First and only.

In accordance with the provisions of Article 166.3 of Law 36/2011 of 10 October, the regulator of social jurisdiction, where the judgment is in whole or in part nullified from the contested collective agreement and that published, it shall also be published in the Official Gazette in which it was inserted.

Accordingly,

This Employment General Address resolves:

First.

Order registration in the corresponding Register of collective agreements and agreements working through electronic means of this management center of the Auto of the Social Room of the National Audience, On 18 May 2014, it is agreed to clarify the material error in the case of the fact that it was made in fact 4 and in the ruling of the Judgment of that Chamber No 078/2015 of 30 April 2015 (published in the "BOE" of 29 May 2015) and concerning the The state collective agreement of security companies for 2015.

Second.

Arrange for publication in the Official State Gazette.

Madrid, June 8, 2015. -Director General of Employment, Xavier Jean Braulio Thibault Aranda.

NATIONAL AUDIENCE-SOCIAL ROOM.

NIG: 28079 24 4 2014 0000423M 01101.

No cars: 0000361 /2014 and 64/15 (cumulative).

Matter: Impug. conventions.

AUTO

Ilmo. Mr. President:

Don Ricardo Bodas Martin.

Ilmos. Mr Magistrates:

Dona Emilia Ruiz-Jarabo Burned.

Don Ramon Gallo Llanos.

In Madrid, to eighteen of May two thousand fifteen.

Examined the actions, having been rapporteur the Ilmo. Mr Justice Don Ricardo Bodas Martin, it is appropriate to issue a resolution in accordance with the following:

Facts

First.

With date 30-04-2015, judgment was given in autos No. 361/14 and 64/15 (accumulated) followed by the CC.OO. Construction and Services instance; Federation of UGT Services; USO and CIG and whose failure is the following literal wording:

' In the complaint for a collective agreement, promoted by UGT, CCOO, USO, to which the IGC acceded, we consider the exception of the lack of action, alleged by the defendants, in the case of the nullity of Article 45.2 of the Treaty. 2012-2014 security company sector agreement, so we absolve the defendants from that claim.

We estimate the demand for the contestation of the convention, promoted by the IGC, to which UGT, CC.OO. and USO joined and annul the art. 45.2 of the security companies sector agreement for 2015 and we condemn APROSER, FES, AESPRI, AES, AMPES and ACAES to be and to go through such nullity, as well as to include in the pay of the holidays, in addition to the concepts included in the Table of Retributions of the Annex, the other job additions contained in the art. 66.2 of the Convention. "

Second.

In both proceedings, the ELA-STV union was co-sued, which appeared at the trial held on 29-042015 represented by the Letrada dona Rosario Martín Narrillos, in which it adhered to both demands as stated in the minutes extended to the effect.

Third.

With date 08-05-2015 has been filed written by the legal representation of the ATTORNEY-STV codefendant requesting clarification of the sentence in its edent of fact 4. º and in the failure of the same, in the sense that it is done Note that the said Union adhered to both demands.

Fundamentals of Law

Unique.

Article 267.3 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary, in relation to art. 214 of the LEC, allows the Courts to clarify some obscure concept and to rectify at any time the omissions or defects that may suffer the sentences and cars that need to be remedied to take them fully to effect.

In the present case it is evident that the union ELA-STV adhered to the demands 361/14 and 64/15 (accumulated) so it proceeds its clarification in the requested terms.

Viewed the cited legal precepts and other general application,

Dispositive Party

The Room agrees to clarify the material error that has occurred in the dated 30-04-2015 statement that remains as follows:

In fact 4. edent of fact the statement must be included:

The ELA-STV Union adhered to both demands.

Ruling of the Statement will be as follows:

In the demand for the challenge of collective agreement, promoted by UGT, CC.OO., USO, to which the IGC and ELA-STV joined, we consider the exception of lack of action, alleged by the defendants, in what affects the nullity of the article 45.2 of the 2012-2014 security companies sector agreement, so we absolve the defendants from that claim.

We estimate the demand for the contestation of the convention, promoted by the IGC, to which UGT, CC.OO, USO and ELA-STV joined and annul the art. 45.2 of the security companies sector agreement for 2015 and we condemn APROSER, FES, AESPRI, AES, AMPES and ACAES to be and to go through such nullity, as well as to include in the pay of the holidays, in addition to the concepts included in the Table of Retributions of the Annex, the other job additions contained in the art. 66.2 of the convention.

We ratify the rest of the resolution in all its terms.

Against this Auto that is an indissoluble part of the cited Judgment, the same resource is granted that was given in front of it.

So by this car, we pronounce it, we send and sign.

Diligence. -Then the orderly is fulfilled; I give faith.