Categories: Insights, Do you know that

Tag: Covid-19, Dispositivi di protezione individuale, Riders


30 Apr 2020

DID YOU KNOW THAT… riders must be equipped with personal protective equipment against the risk of contagion?

Urged by requests for protection from some bicycle couriers who proposed an emergency appeal, as per article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedures, the Court of Florence (Florence Labour Court 1 April 2020) first, and then Bologna’s (Bologna Labour Court 14 April 2020) ruled that food delivery platforms have an obligation to provide them with suitable personal protection equipment (“PPE”) against the risk of contagion.

Both of the rulings recognise the existence of fumus boni iuris (grounds for the claim), considering employment with food delivery platforms in the context of article 2 paragraph 1 of Legislative Decree no. 81/2015 with the consequent application of laws related to employment.

Then, in terms of the specific profiles regarding application of the measures and protections regarding health and safety:

  • the Court of Florence refers to the provisions recently introduced by Section V-bis of Legislative Decree no. 81/15, confirming that the customer – in this case the food delivery platform – is required in relation to workers, to comply with laws and regulations concerning the protection of workplace health and safety at its own effort and expense, as per Legislative Decree no. 81/08;
  • the Court of Bologna did not make any referral to this legislation and bases its ruling on the type of activity performed by the bicycle couriers and reasons for protecting both the workers and customers, as per how they result from the emergency legislation.

In addition to the fumus boni iuris requirement, the aforesaid Courts confirm the existence of periculum in mora (imminent and irreparable detriment). This is due to the fact that the performance of the work activity without the aforesaid PPE could expose bicycle couriers, pending a specific ruling, to detriment, including irreparable, of their right to health.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

1 Sep 2026

Company files deleted from the PC: dismissal lawful even without proof of damage

The matter arises from the disciplinary dismissal of an employee performing general secretarial duties who, upon returning the company computer following a change in her duties, handed back…

1 Sep 2026

Overtime work: a summary schedule is not enough, employees must provide strict evidence of both the hours worked and the extent of the overtime performed

With order no. 20700 of 18 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court once again addressed the issue of overtime work, reiterating that employees claiming overtime pay must strictly…

1 Sep 2026

Did you know that… an individual allowance that has remained unchanged for years may become non-absorbable?

In judgment no. 24475 of 5 August 2026, the Employment Section of the Italian Supreme Court confirmed that an individual allowance (i.e. “superminimo”), although normally subject to the…

3 Aug 2026

Pay Transparency: the first requests from employees are starting to arrive (Il Sole 24 Ore, 3 august 2026 – Vittorio De Luca)

Two months after the decree. Since Legislative Decree 96/2026 came into force on 7 June, according to a flash survey conducted by GIDP, 8% of HR directors have…

30 Jul 2026

Corporate controls and data protection: what balance?

A recent judgment of the Court of Pisa, No. 800 of 13 June 2026, addresses a topic of particular interest for companies: the delicate balance between the protection…

30 Jul 2026

Unfair dismissal and reinstatement: the employee must repay the payment in lieu of notice

With order no. 22187 of 28 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether payment in lieu of notice paid to an employee must be…