Categories: Insights, Publications

Tag: Covid-19, diritto emergente, smart working


4 May 2020

Can we talk about emergent right to remote working? (Il Quotidiano del Lavoro de Il Sole 24 Ore, 4 May 2020 – Vittorio De Luca, Antonella Iacobellis)

The emergency measures issued by the Government to manage the pandemic emergency of Covid-19 have attributed, to all intents and purposes, to remote-working also the function of a contagion containment measure and consequently a means to protect workers’ health.

Remote-working, in fact, is a way of carrying out work activities that, while allowing them to continue, allows, by substantially reduction of the number of people entering and visiting the workplace, to limit contact between people and consequently also the risks of contagion.

Although it is true that it is not possible to state that the worker has a right to remote-working, it is equally true that it is not possible to state that the employer has a mere faculty to activate smart-working at the time of the COVID19.

On this point, Court of Grosseto, through the decision of April 23, 2020, that we will examine later, stated that: “In this context, the use of remote-working, governed in general by Law No 81 of 22 May 2017, has been considered a priority. For obvious reasons, this modality of work cannot, and could not, be imposed in a general and indiscriminate manner; nevertheless, it has been repeatedly and strongly recommended and even considered as an ordinary way of performing the service in the Public Administration. (see art. 87, D.L. 18/2020). In addition, pursuant to art. 39, para. 2, of Legislative Decree no. 18/2020, “workers in the private sector, suffering from serious and proven pathologies with reduced working capacity, have priority in performing remote work pursuant to articles 18 to 23 of the law of 22 May 2017,”.

The case originates from an emergency action pursuant to Article 700 of the Italian Criminal Code filed by a worker who claimed the right to trigger remote-working.

Read the full version of the article in Italian language here.

Source: Il Quotidiano del Lavoro

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

8 Apr 2026

Management of corporate email after termination of employment: the limits according to the Italian Data Protection Authority

The Italian Data Protection Authority (i.e. “Garante per la protezione dei dati personali”) has once again provided guidance on how employers should manage corporate email accounts after the…

8 Apr 2026

Oral dismissal: the burden of proof on the employee

With order no. 4077 of 23 February 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of oral dismissal, holding that an employee challenging the termination of the employment…

8 Apr 2026

DID YOU KNOW THAT… incompatibility between colleagues may justify the transfer of an employee? 

The Italian Supreme Court, with order no. 4198 of 25 February 2026, held that an employee’s transfer may be lawfully implemented also in the presence of a situation…

7 Apr 2026

The boundary between rest and inactivity in the management of working hours (AIDP – HR Online, 7 April 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Alesia Hima)

In the organizational language of companies, terms such as “breaks,” “waiting times,” or “downtime” are often used. In operational practice, these expressions tend to be treated almost as…

17 Mar 2026

Equal pay: green light for the decree on pay equality and wage transparency (People are People, 16 March 2026 – Claudia Cerbone, Martina De Angeli)

Claudia Cerbone and Martina De Angeli, professionals at the De Luca & Partners firm, author this article dedicated to the draft legislative decree approved last February 5 by…

10 Mar 2026

The transfer of the employee is lawful when there is incompatibility with the company environment (Camera di Commercio Italo-Francese, 10 March 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Silvia Zulato)

With Order No. 4198 of 25 February 2026, the Italian Supreme Court (Court of Cassation) – Labour Section – reaffirmed that a situation of environmental incompatibility may justify…