Categories: Insights, Practice


29 Nov 2016

National Labour Inspectorate: early guidelines on the installation of GPS on company cars

The newly created National Labour Inspectorate has assumed a position on the interpretation to give to the new clause 4 of the Workers’ Statute as regards the installation of GPS equipment on company cars. With circular no. 2 dated 7 November 2016, the Inspectorate accordingly amended the opinion given on this point by the Milan Inter-regional Labour Administration in May 2016. According to the inter-regional administration “the GPS system (…) should not be considered separately from the car on which it is installed and the prior consent of the trade union or ministry authorisation is not required for its installation”. Following this indication, a number of Labour Administrations published on their websites that “following the entry into force of Legislative Decree 151/2015, the installation of GPS systems on board vehicles for business use is no longer subject to any authorisation by this office”. A different view is taken however by the Inspectorate according to whom, generally speaking, geolocation systems are “<<additional>> devices with respect to working tools, and are not used primarily and essentially to execute work, but to respond to additional insurance, organizational and productive needs or to ensure job safety” and “only in very special cases – if tracking systems are installed to actually perform the job (…), or installation is required by legislative or regulatory laws (… ) – can it be assumed that they end up by <<becoming>> actual working tools.“ This means that only in the latter case may the procedure to protect civil liberties set forth by section 4, paragraph 1, of the Workers’ Statute be excluded.

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…