The Municipal Corporation of Santiago approved this Thursday the pending payment of overtime carried out by firefighters, local police and general administration officials, for a total amount of 842,000 euros, not including social security. The authorization was obtained with votes in favor of the bipartisan (BNG and Compostela Aberta) and the PSOE, but with the abstention of the unaffiliated parties and the PP.
The approved file includes fire and police overtime between June and October 2025 and the October holidays and the extraordinary services of the general administration staff between January and October. This payment is in addition to the already authorized payment of 2,172,487.76 euros, which received the green light during the November plenary session.
The Finance Advisor, Manuel César, recalled that This payment must be approved in full because the total amount exceeds the established limits that these gratuities must maintain. He thus celebrated that “for the first time in recent years” the payment of bonuses for all municipal staff was regularized and that the Town Hall was “aware” of them: “This required a great effort”.
Criticism of the opposition
Although the payment took place, it did so despite criticism from the opposition. José Ramon de la Fuente (PP) sees a file “full of irregularities”, among which he cites the fact that there is no “prior authorization” to carry out the work and that the volume of hours worked “far exceeds the established annual limit”.
The popular mayor, who recognizes that this is partly a “legacy situation”, sees it as a “the problem of today” as it “is faced”, after which Caesar reproached him for casting “doubt” on the reports of those responsible for the services.
For her part, the socialist Marta Abal, who congratulated the local government To achieve “on-time” payment, he criticized the use of bonuses to “ensure ordinary services” as “something structural”.
Likewise, the non-registered councilor Gonzalo Muíños disgraced the mayor, Goretti Sanmartín, for calling the conflict a a “question of money”. “It is not a question of money, it is a question of rights, of the spirit of negotiation and of management,” he criticized, while describing the conflict as a consequence of “negligent accounting management”.
Disagreeing with their attacks, the councilor insisted on his repeated defense of demands that she considers “legitimate”: “It was necessary to find an economic and legal adequacy, just as his professionalism has never been questioned.
About The Author
