With note no. 9326 of December, 9, 2024, the National Labour Inspectorate (i.e. “Ispettorato Nazionale del Lavoro” or “INL”) provided an overview of the new sanctions regime introduced by Article 27 of Italian Legislative Decree No. 81/2008, as amended by Italian Decree-Law 19/2024 (converted by Law 56/2024). This regime applies to all violations concerning the credit license (i.e., “patente a crediti”) as of October 1, 2024.
Paragraph 11 of Article 27 establishes a system of penalties for companies operating on construction sites without a valid credit license or with a score lower than 15 points (it should be noted that the initial score is 30 points.)
The legislator has provided for an administrative sanction equal to 10% of the value of the works (excluding VAT), with a minimum penalty of EUR 6,000, which is not subject to the warning procedure under Article 301-bis of Italian Legislative Decree No. 81/2008. The value of the works to be considered is the amount specified in the contract or subcontract. If the value of the works is unknown or below the minimum threshold, the penalty of Euro 6,000 will still apply. However, a reduction to one-third of the penalty is possible if the fine is paid within 60 days.
The law also defines the liability of the principal. The principal is responsible for verifying whether the contractor holds a valid credit license or an equivalent document. If the company is not required to hold the license, the principal must verify the SOA qualification certificate. This certificate verifies the company’s economic, organizational, and technical qualifications, ensuring that the company meets specific criteria required for the execution of public works.
The note distinguishes between different hypotheses regarding the principal’s duty of verification.
The authority responsible for issuing the injunction is the Labour Inspectorate (i.e. “Ispettorato del Lavoro”) in the jurisdiction where the employee who detected the violation is based. In the absence of a specific provision, all supervisory authorities listed in Article 13 of Italian Legislative Decree No. 81/2008 are authorized to identify the violation and impose the relevant sanction.
Penalties must be paid via the “PagoPA” system (the Italian government’s digital payment platform) for fines issued by the Labour Inspectorate. For fines issued by other supervisory bodies, payment must be made to a dedicated account, with the reason for the payment clearly indicated.
Another key update introduced by paragraph 11 is the exclusion of penalized companies from participating in public works under Italian Legislative Decree No. 36/2023 for a period of six months. In this case, the supervisory authority must notify the sanction both to the Italian National Anti-Corruption Authority (i.e., “ANAC”) and the Ministry of Infrastructure, which will issue the exclusion order. The penalized company or self-employed worker will be removed from the construction site by inspection authorities and will be notified that they are prohibited from working on any temporary or mobile construction site.
The new sanctions regime strengthens the responsibilities of both principals and companies operating on construction sites, imposing significant penalties on those who fail to comply with the newly enacted legislation. Penalties vary according to the specific situation, but adherence to the regulations is crucial, not only to ensure compliance with the current legal framework but also to protect workers’ health and safety.e il rispetto della sua ratio più profonda, ossia tutelare e assicurare la salute e la sicurezza dei lavoratori.
Other related insights:
With ruling no. 2618 of February 4, 2025, the Italian Supreme Court upheld the legitimacy of the dismissal for just cause of an employee who, while on parental leave, engaged in parallel employment, thus abusing this right.
In the case in exam, during his parental leave, the employee had started a car-buying and selling businesswithout giving prior notice to the employer. The activity was uncovered following an investigation carried out by a private agency commissioned by the employer. According to the investigation, it emerged that the parallel employment was neither occasional nor episodic, thus conflicting with the purposes of paid parental leave. As the Supreme Court stated, these purposes «require that during its enjoyment, the time and energy of the working father be dedicated, even through his presence, to fulfilling the emotional needs of the child».
This conduct, constituting an abuse of parental leave, therefore justified the employee’s dismissal. The Supreme Court stated: «where it is established that the parental leave is used by the father to engage in a different work activity, it constitutes an abuse of the right for diversion from the function of the right, which can be assessed by the judge to determine the existence of a just cause for dismissal. It is not relevant that the performance of such activity contributes to a better organization of the family».
Therefore, the Court reaffirmed that parental leave, while being a right of the working parent, cannot be used for purposes unrelated to those for which it was established.
In conclusion, the abuse of parental leave justifies a dismissal, as it constitutes not only a serious violation of the employee’s duty of loyalty but also a behavior with clear social disvalue, in light of the social and economic costs involved.
Other related insights:
The appointment for the 5th Welfare & HR Summit of Il Sole 24 Ore is on Thursday 20 February from 3 p.m. onwards. The event will see the participation of Vittorio De Luca among the experts convened to take stock of the new paradigms for companies, between new regulations and social changes.
Vittorio De Luca will analyse the main labour law aspects related to the discipline of contracting and the innovations introduced, most recently, by the ‘Corrective Decree’, which, in line with the most recent regulatory, administrative and jurisprudential interventions, aims to make the contracting system more transparent, with the ultimate goal of protecting workers employed in outsourcing. An approach that will also have a considerable impact on companies that use third-party suppliers, which are obliged to adapt quickly.
Click here for further details and to register for the event.
Italian Law 104/1992 grants employees paid leave to assist family members with disabilities, with the cost covered by INPS (the National Institute for Social Security). However, misuse of this benefit has led to judicial investigations to identify potential violations of the law. Case law has helped clarify what constitutes abuse.
The law grants leave for caregiving but does not clearly define the conditions under which its use becomes abusive. In general, courts have adopted a broad interpretation, stating that caregiving includes all tasks a disabled person cannot perform independently, not just personal assistance at home.
In a recent ruling (October 10, 2024, no. 26417), the Italian Supreme Court clarified that caregiving does not require constant presence at the family member’s home, but can include errands, as long as they are aimed at the disabled person’s well-being. The Court also confirmed that using leave outside working hours does not count as abuse, since the leave is granted on a daily, not hourly, basis.
In another ruling (September 9, 2024, no. 24130), the Court stated that personal activities, as long as they do not interfere with caregiving, are not considered abusive. However, if the employee engages in activities far from caregiving, such as going to the beach instead of assisting a family member (Cass. Civ., Labor Section, June 16, 2021, no. 17102), it is considered misuse, and the employer can take disciplinary action, including dismissal for just cause.
Employers can hire investigative agencies to check for abuse, but these investigations must be conducted within legal boundaries, respecting the employee’s privacy.
Continue reading the full version published in Il Sole 24 Ore.
Article 33 of Law 104/1992 regulates paid leave ‘for the assistance, social integration and rights of disabled persons’.
These permits consist in the possibility for public or private, full-time or part-time employees to be absent from work, while retaining the right to remuneration and figurative contribution coverage for pension purposes, in order to assist a disabled person in a situation of seriousness, who is not hospitalised on a full-time basis.
A ‘disability in a situation of seriousness’, pursuant to Article 3(3) of Law 104/1992, is defined as a single or multiple impairment that has reduced personal autonomy, related to age, in such a way as to require permanent, continuous and comprehensive assistance in the individual sphere or in the sphere of relationships.
Continue reading the full version in Modulo Contenzioso 24 of Il Sole 24 Ore.
