Categories: Case Law
The Supreme Court, with the sentence no. 9965 of the April 11th, 2012, stated that the employer who reinstates only partially an executive of the company union representative, just paying the salary and acknowledging him/her the trade rights but refusing his/her work performance, is subject to administrative sanction provided for by the art. 10, par. 8, of the Law no. 300/70 (so called “Statuto dei Lavoratori”) (i.e. payment of an amount equal to the daily wage due to the employee, for each day of delay, in favour of the INPS Fund for the pensions adjustment).
Categories: Legislation
INAIL, with note No. 3760/2012, has clarified that the social security contribution irregularity for the obtainment of the so called “DURC” cannot be declared if the company was not primarily invited to the regularization, giving a period of 15 days.
Categories: Case Law
Court of Cassation, with the sentence no. 9644 of the June 13th, 2012, stated that with reference to the disciplinary sanctions the advertising guarantee of the disciplinary code through the post accessible to everyone, is not applied in case the disciplinary proceeding is referred to circumstances regarding a breach of basic duties related to the employment relationship.
Categories: Legislation
The Ministry of Employment, with the answer to the question no. 16/2012, specified that the request of compliance advice to the bilateral authorities does not represent an obligation for the employer but a chance and a guarantee on the proper drafting of the individual training plan.
Categories: Case Law
The Court of Cassation, with judgment No. 9199/2012, stated that the employer should not simply adopt safety measures at work suggested by the fully-developed technology, but has also to supervise that these measures are applied by the employees.
