DLP Insights

The decree no. 23/2015 omitted regulating dismissal for exceeding the protection period. Therefore, for new hirings, the unlawfulness of this type of dismissal is considered as unjustified dismissals, with consequent granting of two months pay for each year of job seniority with a minimum of 4 and maximum of 24 months pay (in small companies the worker can ask for halved increasing protection, with a minimum of 2 and maximum of 6 months pay).

The Milan Court, Labour Section, with its ruling of 29 January 2015, established that an employer who intends to dismiss more than five workers for objective reasons in one hundred and twenty days and at more than one shop, must apply the layoff procedure where the single shops (even if located in different provinces) do not constitute autonomous production units from a technical and organisational standpoint.

The definition of “definitive closure” of a business needs to be clarified. For the overhaul of social shock absorbers in terms of employment, as required by the Jobs Act, the desire of the legislator is to limit the application framework of these instruments, as well as to rid them of the primarily welfare connotation they ....

With its ruling no. 3486/2015, the Cassation Court established that if a company is sentenced to reinstate a worker due to wrongful dismissal, the months pay that the worker would have received if he had accepted the company’s offer of a new job, are subtracted from the total compensation for damages owed to the worker (calculated as wages lost from the day of dismissal until the day of reinstatement).

La Chambre du Travail du Tribunal de Milan a rejeté le recours présenté par un ancien salarié d’une société cliente de notre cabinet, qui s’était adressé au Tribunal afin que soit reconnue l’illégitimité de son licenciement pour dépassement de la période de congé maladie, déplorant que l’infirmité dont il était atteint avait été provoquée et ....