Absence of joint labor liability between AyA and ASADASInexistencia de responsabilidad solidaria del AyA con las ASADAS en materia laboral

FIFTH: ANALYSIS of the CASE under STUDY:[...] First of all, it is timely to bear in mind that the associations that administer rural aqueducts, known as “ASADAS,” are created and regulated by the Ley de Asociaciones (N° 218, of August 8, 1939) and by its regulations. However, they have the particularity of administering a public domain asset and providing a public service, for which reason they are also governed by the Reglamento de las Asociaciones Administradoras de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Comunales (ASADAS) (Decreto Ejecutivo N° 32529-S-MINAE, of 2005) and by the Ley de Creación del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (Ley N° 2726, of 1961). This latter law, specifically in its article 2, establishes the legal birth of the “ASADAS” when it states: “(…) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, whenever this is conducive to the better provision of the services and in accordance with the respective regulations (…)”. The so-called “ASADAS” must sign a delegation agreement (convenio de delegación) with the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados in order to provide the public aqueduct and sewerage service in the corresponding geographical area of the country. This figure of the delegation agreement is considered a concession for the management of a public service, where “AyA,” as the entity empowered by law to provide this service, grants it to a private concessionaire, the “ASADA,” so that the latter provides it in compliance with the principles governing the provision of the public aqueduct and sewerage service. By virtue of the foregoing, the “ASADAS” hold a position of power over the users, similar to that held by “AyA.” On this point, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has stated: “(…) From the foregoing, it is evident that the rural aqueduct administrative associations, insofar as they administer that public service by agreement with the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, are, by law, in a position of power with respect to the users and exercise, for that purpose, a series of public powers and functions, all of which makes them passive subjects of the amparo action against private parties (article 57 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional (…)”. (Voto N° 2006-165, at 16:39 hours on 14/02/2006). In addition to the above, it is necessary to consider that community aqueduct and sewerage administrative associations (ASADAS), as is the case of the co-defendant Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta, constitute legal persons of a private nature that carry out activities of public interest since they provide the community with a public service –which does not modify their private character– and that, as such, they must be organized in accordance with the guidelines established in the Ley de Asociaciones. They carry out work of public interest by virtue of the delegation figure, but this does not imply that they form part of the public sector.[...]

As a direct consequence of the foregoing, Acueductos y Alcantarillados, as the governing public entity on the matter, should have assumed the management, operation, maintenance, and development of the aqueduct and sewerage system of the aforementioned association in order to ensure the right to health and drinking water of the residents of that community. However, it is not possible to interpret that this intervention to safeguard the public drinking water service in the community entails joint and several labor liability for the public institution with respect to the workers hired by the Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta.[...] In this way, within the context of the regulatory framework set forth above, it is clear that it is not possible to attribute joint and several labor liability to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados as interpreted by the plaintiff; both numeral 34 of Decreto Ejecutivo N° 32529-S-MINAE of February 2, 2005 (Gaceta N°150 of August 5, 2005), and article 54.a of the current Decreto Ejecutivo Nº 42582-S-MINAE, of the month of August 2020, expressly indicate that the employment relationship established by this special type of private association with the workers they hire does not generate any legal link with Acueductos y Alcantarillados, so that it is a direct liability of the Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta, as decided in the appealed judgment. That being so, the first three grievances raised by the plaintiff must be rejected due to their lack of merit.

They perform a public-interest task by virtue of the delegation (delegación) mechanism, but that does not imply that they form part of the public sector. [...]

As a direct consequence of the foregoing, Acueductos y Alcantarillados, as the governing public entity on the matter, had to assume the administration, operation, maintenance, and development of the aqueduct and sewer system of the aforementioned association in order to ensure the right to health and to potable water of the residents of that community. But it is not possible to interpret that this intervention to safeguard the public potable water service in the community entails joint employment liability (responsabilidad laboral solidaria) on the part of the public institution with respect to the workers hired by the Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta. [...] In this way, within the context of the regulatory framework set forth above, it is clear that it is not possible to attribute joint employment liability to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados as interpreted by the plaintiff; both numeral 34 of Decreto Ejecutivo N° 32529-S-MINAE of February 2, 2005 (Gaceta N° 150 of August 5, 2005), and article 54.a of the current Decreto Ejecutivo Nº 42582-S-MINAE, of the month of August 2020, expressly indicate that the employment relationship established by this special type of private association with the workers they hire does not generate any legal connection with Acueductos y Alcantarillados, meaning that it is a direct liability of the Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta, as was decided in the appealed judgment. This being the case, the first three grievances raised by the plaintiff must be rejected by virtue of their inadmissibility." This figure of the delegation agreement (convenio de delegación) is considered a public service management concession (concesión de gestión de servicio público), whereby "AyA," as the entity legally empowered to provide this service, grants it in favor of a private concessionaire, the "ASADA," so that the latter provides it in compliance with the principles governing the provision of the public service of aqueducts and sewers. By virtue of the foregoing, the "ASADAS" hold a position of power over users, similar to that held by "AyA." On this point, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has stated: "(...) From the foregoing, it is evident that the rural aqueduct administration associations (asociaciones administradores de acueductos rurales), insofar as they administer that public service under an agreement with the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), are, de jure, in a position of power with respect to users and exercise, for that purpose, a series of public competencies and functions, all of which makes them passive subjects of the amparo action against private parties (article 57 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction) (...)." (Voto N° 2006-165, of 16:39 hours on 02/14/2006). In addition to the foregoing, it is necessary to consider that the communal aqueduct and sewer administration associations (ASADAS), as is the case of the co-defendant Rural Aqueduct Association of San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta (Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta), constitute legal entities of a private nature that carry out activities of public interest, since they provide the community with a public service—which does not modify their private character—and that, as such, they must be organized in accordance with the guidelines established in the Law of Associations. They perform a task of public interest by virtue of the delegation figure, but this does not imply that they form part of the public sector. [...]

As a direct consequence of the foregoing, AyA (Acueductos y Alcantarillados), as the governing public entity on the matter, should have assumed the administration, operation, maintenance, and development of the aqueduct and sewer system of the aforementioned association in order to secure the right to health and potable water of the neighboring persons of that community. But it is not possible to interpret that this intervention to safeguard the public service of potable water in the community entails joint and several labor liability (responsabilidad laboral solidaria) of the public institution with respect to the workers hired by the Rural Aqueduct Association of San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta. [...]

Thus, in the context of the regulatory normative framework set forth above, it is clear that it is not possible to attribute joint and several labor liability to the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers as the plaintiff interprets, since both numeral 34 of Decreto Ejecutivo N° 32529-S-MINAE of February 2, 2005 (Gaceta N°150 of August 5, 2005), and article 54.a of the current Decreto Ejecutivo Nº 42582-S-MINAE, of the month of August 2020, expressly indicate that the labor relationship established by this special type of private associations with the workers they hire does not generate any legal bond (vínculo jurídico) with AyA, such that it is a direct liability of the Rural Aqueduct Association of San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta, as was resolved in the contested judgment. Thus, the first three grievances raised by the plaintiff must be rejected due to their inadmissibility."

"QUINTO: ANÁLISIS del CASO en ESTUDIO:[...] En primer término, es oportuno tener presente que las asociaciones que administran acueductos rurales, conocidas como “ASADAS”, son creadas y reguladas por la Ley de Asociaciones (N° 218, del 8 de agosto de 1939) y por su reglamento. Sin embargo, tienen la particularidad de administrar un bien de dominio público y prestan un servicio público, por lo cual están regidas también por el Reglamento de las Asociaciones Administradoras de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Comunales (ASADAS) (Decreto Ejecutivo N° 32529-S-MINAE, de 2005) y por la Ley de Creación del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (Ley N° 2726, de 1961). Esta última ley, específicamente en su artículo 2 establece el nacimiento legal de las “ASADAS” al enunciar: “(…) Queda facultada la institución para convenir con organismos locales, la administración de tales servicios o administrarlos a través de juntas administradoras de integración mixta entre el Instituto y las respectivas comunidades, siempre que así conviniere para la mejor prestación de los servicios y de acuerdo con los reglamentos respectivos (…)”. Las denominadas “ASADAS” deben firmar un convenio de delegación con el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados para poder brindar el servicio público de acueductos y alcantarillados en el área geográfica del país que corresponda. Esta figura del convenio de delegación se estima como una concesión de gestión de servicio público, en donde el “AyA” como ente facultado por ley para brindar este servicio, lo concesiona a favor de un concesionario privado, la “ASADA”, para que este último lo brinde cumpliendo con los principios que rigen la prestación del servicio público de acueductos y alcantarillados. En virtud de lo anterior, las “ASADAS” tiene una posición de poder sobre las personas usuarias, similar a la que tiene “AyA”. Sobre este punto ha dicho la Sala Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de Justicia: “(…) De lo anteriormente indicado, resulta evidente que las asociaciones administradores de acueductos rurales, en cuanto administran por convenio con el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados ese servicio público, se encuentran, de derecho, en una posición de poder respecto de los usuarios y ejercen, para ese fin, una serie de competencias y funciones públicas, todo lo cual las hace sujetos pasivos del recurso de amparo contra particulares (artículo 57 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional (…)”. (Voto N° 2006-165, de las 16:39 horas del 14/02/2006). Aunado a lo anterior es preciso considerar que, las asociaciones administradoras de acueductos y alcantarillados comunales (ASADAS), como es el caso de la codemandada Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta, constituyen personas jurídicas de naturaleza privada que realizan labores de interés público pues brindan a la comunidad un servicio público –lo que no modifica su carácter privado- y que, como tales, se deben encontrar organizadas de acuerdo con los lineamientos establecidos en la Ley de Asociaciones”. Realizan una labor de interés público en virtud de la figura de la delegación, pero ello no implica que formen parte del sector público.[...]

Como consecuencia directa de lo anterior, Acueductos y Alcantarillados como entidad pública rectora en el tema, debió asumir la administración, operación, mantenimiento y desarrollo del sistema de acueducto y alcantarillado de la referida asociación a fin de asegurar el derecho a la salud y al agua potable de las personas vecinas de esa comunidad. Pero no es posible interpretar que, ésta intervención para tutelar el servicio público de agua potable en la comunidad conlleve una responsabilidad laboral solidaria de la institución pública respecto a las personas trabajadoras contratadas por la Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta.[...] De esta manera, en el contexto del marco normativo regulatorio antes expuesto queda claro que, no es posible atribuir una responsabilidad laboral solidaria al Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados como lo interpreta el actor, tanto el numeral 34 del Decreto Ejecutivo N° 32529-S-MINAE del 2 de febrero del 2005 (Gaceta N°150 del 5 de agosto del año 2005), como el artículo 54.a del actual Decreto Ejecutivo Nº 42582-S-MINAE, del mes de agosto del año 2020, indican de manera expresa que, la relación laboral establecida por este tipo especial de asociaciones privadas con las personas trabajadoras que contraten, no genera ningún vínculo jurídico con Acueductos y Alcantarillados, de modo que se trata de una responsabilidad directa de la Asociación de Acueducto Rural de San Luis de San Ignacio de Acosta, conforme se resolvió en la sentencia impugnada. Así las cosas, los primeros tres agravios expuestos por el actor deben ser rechazados en virtud de su improcedencia."