Categories: Insights


14 Jul 2011

INPS: THE PREMATURE BIRTH AND THE HOSPITALIZED CHILD POSTPONE THE LEAVE

INPS, with message no. 14448/2011, provided some clarification on the sentence no. 116/2011 according to which the Constitutional Court declared the female employee right, in case of premature birth and hospitalization of the child, to use the compulsory leave period as of the actual entry of the newborn child in the family. The same right is granted to the father if he uses the leave instead of the mother for death or serious illness of the latter, abandonment of the child by the mother or the father sole custody of the child. In addition to the leave postponement, the mother has to offer her working activity during the period of the child hospitalization. Therefore, the mother, before working again during the planned leave period, has to obtain the medical certificates which attest the compatibility of her medical condition with the restarting working activity. If the postponement is requested by the father, as well as the usual documentation attesting his right instead of the mother, he has to enclose to the leave request the medical certification issued by the health facility where the child is hospitalized. Finally, INPS specified that the postponement of compulsory leave after childbirth has not be requested if the child hospitalization is not due to premature birth, but to entirely different reasons.
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 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…