Can I be dismissed for frequently accessing the Internet at work?

It is becoming increasingly common for employees to browse the Internet or check social media during working hours, and cases of this kind have already come before the courts on numerous occasions. The judgments have been clear in establishing that excessive use of the Internet or social media during working hours may constitute grounds for a fair dismissal.

The basis: grounds for dismissal

To analyse these cases, we must refer to Article 54 of the Workers' Statute, which establishes the grounds for terminating an employment contract due to serious and culpable misconduct by the employee. These include:

• Breach of contractual good faith and abuse of trust in the performance of work.
• A continued voluntary reduction in work performance.

We must start from the fact that there is no specific legislation in Spain prohibiting the use of social media at work. However, if there is a genuine impact on work performance or on the company's image, excessive use of social media or the Internet during working hours may constitute grounds for dismissal.

Factors that determine whether Internet use at work may constitute grounds for dismissal

In these cases, the courts analyse the circumstances of each individual case. In general, for a dismissal to be considered fair, several factors must be present:

• Repeated use of the Internet or social media. Occasional access to social media or the Internet during working hours cannot justify dismissal. The courts require repeated access to the Internet or social media and evidence of such access in order to assess the seriousness of the situation.
• Impact on work performance. It must be demonstrated that the employee's access to social media or the Internet during working hours affected their day-to-day work and resulted in errors or delays in tasks, or a reduction in performance.
• An internal company policy that has been communicated to employees. Another important factor is the existence of an internal company policy that has been communicated to employees and establishes specific rules on the use of devices and social media during working hours. This policy should contain, at a minimum, the following:
  o Scope of application. For example, which company devices it applies to.
  o Prohibited uses. These must be clearly detailed, leaving no room for interpretation.
  o Consequences of non-compliance. Employees must be informed of what happens if they fail to comply with company policies.
  o Proof of receipt by the employee. The employee must sign to confirm that they have received this information. This provides clear evidence that they are aware of the consequences.

What have the courts said in these cases?

As we have seen above, the courts have considered this type of case on numerous occasions. Here are some examples:

Judgment of the High Court of Justice of Catalonia of 16 October 2025

In this case, the court ruled that the dismissal of an employee who recorded and published videos on social media during working hours was fair. The circumstances described above were present because her use of the phone caused continual distractions and affected the performance of her work.

Judgment of the High Court of Justice of Castile and León of 2026

In this case, a Mercadona employee had been reprimanded by the company on several occasions for making inappropriate comments or threatening colleagues, leaving his workstation and using his mobile phone during working hours.

Between February and April 2025, he accessed the Internet using the company's computer during working hours to visit unauthorised websites. A total of 7,685 accesses were recorded in February, and the employee was dismissed on disciplinary grounds on 21 May 2025. The employee subsequently brought a claim before the courts of first instance in León, which upheld the fairness of the dismissal. The judgment was appealed before the High Court of Justice of Castile-La Mancha, which once again dismissed the employee's claims, upheld the disciplinary dismissal and ordered the employee to pay the legal costs.

Problems that may arise from content published by an employee

It is not only the amount of time spent using the Internet or social media that matters; the content published is also highly relevant because it may cause harm to the company or to other people.

For example, the following types of content may cause harm:

• Publishing videos from the workplace while wearing the company uniform, where the workplace and, consequently, the company can be identified.
• Sharing confidential company information or confidential internal data.
• Making negative comments about the company, its management or a colleague.
• Acting disloyally towards the company, for example by sharing information that could be used by competitors.

In these cases, the company's reputation may be damaged and, therefore, grounds for disciplinary dismissal may arise.

Cases in which dismissal may be declared unfair

We have looked at cases in which dismissal may be declared fair. However, there are also cases where the circumstances required by the courts for a dismissal to be considered fair are not present, for example:

• The company does not have a clear internal policy.
• Dismissal is a disproportionate sanction in relation to what occurred.
• There has only been occasional use of the Internet or social media.
• Evidence of Internet use was obtained unlawfully by the company.
• There were no prior warnings from the company.

If you have been dismissed for using the Internet or social media, contact our team of labour lawyers so that they can analyse your case and determine whether the requirements for bringing a claim are met.