The
Court of Cassation, with judgment No. 1394 filed on 22 January 2020, once again
drew attention to the use and potential abuse of leave to assist disabled
family members pursuant to Article 33, paragraph 3, of Law No. 104 of 1992. In
particular, the Supreme Court, in affirming the principle that such leave is
granted “in order to assist the disabled person and in a direct causal
relationship with that assistance“, has ruled out that they may be
used “merely as compensation for the energy used by the employee for
that assistance“.
The
facts
The
Court of Appeal of L’Aquila upheld the decision of the Court of Pescara where
the latter had considered it lawful to dismiss a worker for just cause for
abusing his leave under Article 33 paragraph 3 of Law No. 104/1992.
The
District Court found evidence of four instances of abuse of leave by the
employee, in light of a report from an investigating agency (commissioned by
the employer). In particular, it had been demonstrated that out of four days of
leave, the employee had gone to the home of their disabled father for only 15
minutes on only one of the four days.
Against
the decision of the Court of Appeal, the worker appealed to the Court of
Cassation on the sole ground of appeal, alleging infringement and
misapplication of Article 33 paragraph 3 of Law No. 104 of 1992. Specifically,
the worker pointed out that the rule referred to does not impose a necessary
time connection between the period of the leave and the period of direct
assistance to the disabled family member.
The
decision of the Court of Cassation
The
Court of Cassation, in rejecting the appeal and confirming the lawfulness of
the dismissal for just cause, recalled a well-established trend in the case law
according to which “on the basis of the rationale of Law No. 104 of
1992, Article 33, paragraph 3, which attributes to the employee (…) who
assists a disabled person in a serious situation (…) the right to three days’
paid monthly leave, covered by imputed contributions, it is necessary that the
absence from work is directly related to the need for which the right is
recognised, i.e. assistance to the disabled person“. (See
Court of Cassation No. 1529/2019; Court of Cassation No. 8310/2019; Court of
Cassation No. 17968/2016; Court of Cassation No. 9217/2016; Court of Cassation
No. 8784/2015)
The
Supreme Court emphasises that the concept of assistance – even if it is to be
understood in a broad sense (since it may also consist in carrying out tasks of
an administrative, practical or any nature) – cannot in any event disregard the
existence of a direct causal relationship with the interest of the assisted
family member (See Judgement of the Court of Cassation No. 23891/2018).
Therefore,
the Supreme Court continues, “an employee who does not make use of the
leave provided for by the aforementioned Article 33, in line with the function
of the same Article, commits an abuse of the right in that it deprives
the employer of the job performance in violation of the trust placed in the
employee and constitutes, with respect to the social security fund providing
the salary compensation, an undue receipt of the allowance and a misuse of the
welfare intervention” (see Court of Cassation No. 17968/2016).
The
Court of Cassation, in the judgment in question, also confirms its case law
regarding the lawfulness for the employer to use investigative agencies to
monitor its employees. This, especially during periods of suspension of the
employment relationship, when becoming aware of the worker’s behaviour, which,
although unrelated to the performance of the work activity, is relevant from
the point of view of the correct fulfilment of the obligations deriving from
the employment relationship (See Court of Cassation No. 18411/2019).
◊◊◊◊
In
view of the above, no function other than that of assistance to the family
member with a disability can be attributed to the leave to assist this family
member or that is in any case in direct causal relation to it.
It is therefore to be excluded that the leave pursuant to Article 33, paragraph 3, Law 104/1992 may have a purely compensatory or restorative function of the energy used by the worker for the assistance provided.
Therefore,
according to the content of the judgment in question, where an employee uses
the leave in question for purposes other than those referred to above, they
will be committing an abuse of rights which is also relevant from a
disciplinary point of view and which will make it lawful for the employer to
dismiss them for just cause.