With order 16382/2021, the Court of Cassation once again ruled on the critical issues connected with the relationship between wage subsidies anddaily sickness benefits. In accordance with well-established case law, the Court pointed out that, where the ordinary lay-off scheme concerns a case of suspension of production and not merely a reduction in working hours, the related wage subsidy replaces the daily sickness benefit in relation to workers who are absent due to illness.
This case derives from a petition brought by a female employee who asked the Court to declare that the conciliation reached with the company was null and void and, for the matters of interest here, to order payment of the difference in salary due to her unlawful placement on the extraordinary lay-off scheme during suspension of employment due to illness.
The First Instance Court and the Court of Appeal rejected the claimant’s requests, ruling out, in particular, the possibility of challenging the conciliation and the ensuing presence of the alleged defects of non-existence of the reciprocal concessions – since the conciliation had taken place in a protected venue in accordance with Article 2113 of the Civil Code – as well as the validity of the claim for payment of salary differences due to the worker’s unlawful placement on the extraordinary lay-off scheme by virtue of the applicability, due to the same rationale, of Article 3 of Law 464/1972.
Continue reading the full version published on Il Quotidiano del Lavoro of Il Sole 24 Ore.
