Although hired through “contract at increasing protections”, the employee is entitled to be reinstated in case of dismissal for just cause, as long as it is proved in Court that the employer did not previously served the warning letter, and that the organizational reasons grounding the dismissal are made as a pretext. Download Tribunal of Taranto, April 21st, 2017
Sure payments, protections in case of maternity, illnesses and unemployment: those are some of the news provided by the so-called “Statute for self-employed workers” waiting to be published on the Official Journal, reviewing the law on self-employment and regulating for the first time the so-called “smart working”. Download Bill no. 2233-B, approved on May 10th, 2017 Summary chart bill no. 2233-B
There is no unfair competition when a company uses the collaborations of employees who violated the trusty duty towards their former employer, unless they obtain confidential information exclusively hold by the competitor. Download Court of Cassation, May 30th, 2017, no. 13550
It is lawful the economic dismissal despite the balance sheet records profits and there are millionaire investments, when the dismissal is aimed to reach a more efficiency and productive company management, implemented through a different duties reallocation. Download Court of Cassation, May 24th, 2017, no. 13015
To verify the compliance with the principle of immediacy of the warning letter, it shall be taken into consideration the moment when the allegations have been found and the investigations have been completed, since the employer cannot be required to monitor the employees’ work on a daily and continuously basis. Download Court of Cassation, May 19th, 2017, no. 12712
If the employer transfers the employee without proved organizational reasons, the employee may obtain biological and moral damages if he/she proves that the employer’s decision caused depression and anxiety. Download Court of Cassation, May 16th, 2017, no. 12084
It is lawful to dismiss for just cause the employee caught, at the end of the shift, with a coffee box in his/her pocket, without sales receipt, because the value of the goods stolen does not matter when the NCBA provides the dismissal in case of stealing. Download Court of Cassation, May 11th, 2017, no. 11558
The employees’ (oral) consent is not enough to install video-cameras within the company’s premises aimed to ensure safety and integrity, because the agreement with the union or the administrative permit released by the labor inspectors are still required. Download Court of Cassation, May 8th, 2017, no. 22148
If the verbal quarrel with the superior, insulting but not followed by physical violence, occurs during the coffee break, the employee cannot be dismissed because this is not listed by the NCBA as a just cause of dismissal, and because the hierarchical relationships does not apply after the working time. Download Court of Cassation, May 5th, 2017, no. 11027
The National Labor Inspectors (INL) released a new note clarifying the need of the agreement with the unions (or the preventive administrative authorization) to install machines allowing the distance surveillance on the employees. Download INL, Notes no. 4619 of May 24th, 2017
The instructions for use have been released with reference to the incentive Dis-coll granted to coordinated and continuative collaborators, also on project basis, for unemployment occurred as of January 1st, 2017 until June 30th, 2017. Download INPS circular, no. 89 of May 23rd, 2017
