The Court of Cassation, in its decision no. 24130 of 9 September 2024, provided important clarifications regarding the use of work permits under Law no. 104 of 1992, stating that a worker may be absent for short personal activities, such as shopping, and that this does not automatically entail an abuse of the right or a violation of the welfare purposes established by the law.
The dispute originated from an employer’s complaint against an employee who had used the so-called “104 leave” to go shopping in a market. In particular, the employer claimed that the employee had uses the leave for activities that did not refer to caring for her disabled family member and had therefore dismissed her for cause, considering that such conduct constituted an abuse of the benefit provided by law.
However, the Court of first instance had rejected the latter interpretation, emphasizing that the activity in question was marginal. In the present case, the employee had, in fact, gone shopping on her way to the home of the assisted family member. Consequently, the dismissal was considered to be unlawful, since the social purposes provided for by Law no. 104/92 had been fulfilled.
Confirming the decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Law no. 104/92 does not require the worker to be present at the home of the family member to be assisted for the entire duration of the working day. In fact, the Court clarified that, although absence from work must be justified on welfare grounds, this does not exclude the possibility of carrying out other minor activities, as long as these activities do not entail a clear violation of the purpose for which the leave was granted. In fact, the judgment reiterates that leave is granted on a daily basis and not on an hourly or chronometric basis.
Continue reading the full version published on Norme e Tributi Plus Lavoro del Il Sole 24 Ore.
