With an order dated 1 July 2020, the Court of Treviso has stressed that the setting up of the internal Committee pursuant to article 13 of the Shared Protocol dated 14 March 2020 (subsequently updated last 24 April) for the implementation and the check of the rules established therein within the workplace must take place in each single local productive unit. If the company has different seats, it is not sufficient to set up a central committee.
Facts of the case
The case at issue derives from a procedure under article 28 of the Workers’ Statute implemented by a trade union against a cleaning and sanitisation services company rendering its services inside hospitals. In particular, the trade union complained about the company’s anti-union behaviour upon the latter’s failure to set up, within the Treviso Hospital, the Committee for the implementation and the check of the rules under the “Shared Protocol regulating the measures for the containment of the spreading of the Covid-19 virus in the workplace”.
The company had limited itself to set up a single central Committee for the North-East headquarters to which, however, the RSA (i.e. the company level unions) and the RLS (i.e. the Workers’ Representative for Safety) Cisl of the Treviso Hospital neither belonged nor had been involved at all.
Finally, the trade union complained about the poor management of the health emergency since the check-ups on the state of health of the workers engaged in the cleaning services at the hospital had never taken place, even following their return from their sick leave.
The Court’s grounds
In the opinion of the Court of Treviso the rule under the Shared Protocol as to the setting up of a Committee “within the company” for the implementation and the check of the internal protocol’s rules with “the participation of the company level unions and the RLS” must be read to the extent that the committees must be implemented in the specific territorial and environmental reality in which the company’s working related activities are placed. This “since it is the place where the actual and specific needs to be monitored, watched out for and solved in a shared manner arise”.
Therefore, the company’s behaviour, which not only fails to set up the Committees at local level, but also fails to involve the RSA of the territorial company seats in the setting up of the central Committee amounts to an anti-union behaviour since it harms union privileges as specifically foreseen and shaped by the anti-Covid regulations.
The rationale underpinning any such conclusion lies in the finding that the pandemic has had an irregular spreading throughout the Italian territory, thus requiring different actions and responses based on the specific dynamics taken locally as from the spreading of the coronavirus.
Finally, the Court has taken the opportunity to specify that the binding nature of the Shared Protocol derives from the fact that the latter has taken on the rank of primary source following its implementation by Prime Ministerial Decree of 26 April 2020.
Others insights related:
Occupational injuries: Employer liability is not automatic
Clarifications provided by INAIL in its Circular No. 22 of 20 May 2020, on Covid19-related illnesses
