DLP Insights

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 7829 of March 28, 2013, confirmed that the bahaviour of a bank’s employee who leaves the cash desk unattended for the coffee break represents just cause for dismissal.

The Court of Cassation with sentence no. 5143 of March 1, confirmed the statement of sentence no. 12257/2012 according to which the criterium provided by the agreement with the Unions for the choice of the employees to be dismissed can be just one and it can be represented by the imminence of retirement, if it allows to make a strict classification and it can be applied and controlled without employer’s discretional choice.

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 5963 of March 11, stated that a company that cancels a professional position is not obliged to train the relevant employee for different duties, but it can dismiss him/her when equivalent duties to be assigned do not exist.

On March 20, the Ministry of Labor signed the decree that enforces for the “disadvantaged employees” the possibility of entering into a temporary supply contract without technical, productive, organizational and substitutive needs, necessary for a term provision.

Amending the rules of individual dismissals, “Fornero Reform” extended the terms for challenging out of Court the fixed term contract in the case of unlawful term provision (Law no. 92/2012 amended Article 32 of Law no. 183/2010).