Proponents of the CEOE's campaign argue that it serves as a necessary wake-up call regarding the tangible, daily impact of absenteeism on the Spanish economy. By using relatable, real-world examples—such as the delay of essential care for the elderly or the disruption of basic services—the campaign aims to make an abstract economic statistic feel concrete for the general public. Supporters believe that businesses cannot be expected to maintain high-quality service levels when a significant portion of their workforce is frequently absent, often without clear justification or adequate mitigation strategies.
From this viewpoint, the primary goal is to initiate a serious public debate about the sustainability of current labor practices. Business leaders emphasize that the high volume of daily absences in the private sector creates a ripple effect that hurts consumers and strains company resources. By framing the issue through the lens of the 'customer experience,' the CEOE is attempting to shift the conversation toward the collective responsibility of maintaining a functional and productive society. Supporters argue that ignoring the scale of this problem only leads to further economic stagnation and reduced competitiveness for Spanish firms.
Ultimately, those backing the campaign suggest that the backlash from unions is a diversionary tactic intended to avoid addressing the underlying issue of productivity. They contend that the focus should remain on finding structural solutions, such as better coordination between companies, mutual insurance providers, and the government, to ensure that the labor market remains efficient. For these stakeholders, the campaign is not an attack on workers, but a call for accountability in a system where the costs of absenteeism are currently borne disproportionately by employers.