The current emergency due to the spread of Covid-19 led the Italian Government to ban dismissals for objective justified reason and suspend layoff proceedings. Initially introduced with the Cure Italy Decree, it was later extended with additional Government conditions. The most recent, art. 12, par. 11, of Decree Law 137/2020 (“Ristori Decree”) extended it until 31 January 2021. However, the Government added exceptions to the ban, including the reduction of personnel under company collective contracts containing a layoff incentive for subscribing employees. The union counterparties of these agreements are those that are comparatively more representative at national level. The concept of collective contract was introduced by art. 51 of Legislative Decree 81/2015 stating that such contracts are “national, territorial or company contracts signed by unions comparatively more representative at national level”. However, unlike art. 51, these agreements cannot be signed at amalgamated or company Unions for sectors not covered by interconfederal agreements. These workers will receive involuntary unemployment benefits (NASPI).

D.L. 23/2020 was published in the Official Gazette on 8 April. It contains credit and tax support measures for Italian companies (“Liquidity Decree”). The measures include government guarantees on loans from banks where companies have signed loan agreements. The guarantee is provided by a company 100% controlled by the Ministry of Economy and Finance (“SACE S.p.a.”). Companies must agree “to manage employment levels through union agreements” as one of the conditions. Even if the Government’s approach is not perfect, the legislation clearly states that companies requesting this guarantee must manage surplus employees with a union agreement. It also raises numerous interpretation problems. There are (i) no indications on the representation requirements for unions that can sign these agreements, and (ii) no indications useful for identifying the hypothetical agreement subject, (iii) the meaning of “manage employment levels” is not clear and (iv) the consequences for failure to reach a union agreement are not mentioned. We hope explanations are forthcoming when it becomes law.