Bonilla's dismissal from the CACT, seen for sentencing after the trial was held this Tuesday

The Social Court number 1 of Arrecife has hosted this Tuesday the celebration of the trial for the dismissal of the Tourist Centers of the president of the Company Committee, Antonio Bonilla, which has been seen for sentencing.

Bonilla's dismissal from the CACT occurred last November as a result of a file that was opened against him "for lack of professional secrecy", as explained at the time by the workers' labor advisor, Andrés Barreto, who, however, accused the CACT management of "wanting to make" the president of the Company Committee disappear.

"The problem is that it is Bonilla and there are upcoming union elections and once again the nerves have confused them," Barreto said after the dismissal, announcing then that his dismissal would be denounced in the Courts for being considered null.

Specifically, according to the legal advisor of the workers, Antonio Bonilla was accused of "having been using a sanctioning file of a worker of the Centers", based on "a WhatsApp that Bonilla sent". However, Andrés Barreto denied that this WhatsApp message had come from the president of the Company Committee, but stated that "it was already swarming", because it had "surprised" that "the same day that the file was sent to the Company Committee, that person died".

A dismissal that united associations, unions and company committees

The dismissal of Antonio Bonilla from the CACT unleashed a wave of support reactions from associations, unions and different company committees, to the point that a total of 15 organizations created a platform to denounce the "repression" of the president of the Company Committee of the CACT.

However, apart from the trial held this Monday, in which the different parties have presented their versions, the family of the CACT worker who died last August announced that they would denounce Antonio Bonilla in the Courts, stating then that the company management had acted "prior request" of theirs for understanding that the president of the Company Committee had "committed a very serious fault by providing confidential information".