Categories: Insights, Practice

Tag: licenziamenti collettivi


29 Jun 2020

Coordination between the Safe Italy Decree Law and Relaunch Decree Law: INL note no. 160 of 3 June 2020

With its note no. 160 of 3 June 2020 the National Labour Inspectorate provided some clarifications concerning the amendments made to Decree Law no. 34/2020 (“Relaunch D.L.”)to D.L. no. 18/2020 (“Save Italy D.L.”) already converted by Law no. 27/2020, in order to help in the interpreter in an analysis of the various regulatory provisions that have been issued and overlapped in recent months.

The main indications provided by the Inspectorate regard the ban on dismissals as per art. 46 of the Save Italy Decree Law and the exceptional provisions on fixed-term contracts introduced during the Covid-19 emergency.

Amendments to art. 46 of the Save Italy Decree Law: collective and individual dismissals for justified objective reason

In terms of the first profile, the INL underlined that when the Save Italy decree was converted into law a specific exclusion was introduced by the ban on dismissals for contracts and, specifically, in the case where “the personnel involved in the termination, already employed in the contract, is rehired after take over by a new contractor”. This means – as explained in the note in question – that the ban on collective and individual dismissals for justified objective reason is not valid in cases where the new contractor absorbs the personnel employed in the contract. Instead, if the personnel is not reabsorbed this ban remains valid for the departing contractor.

Again in reference to dismissals, INL stated that the Relaunch Decree extended for five months. starting from 17 March 2020, the terms related to the relative ban: during this time period collective dismissal procedures cannot be started and pending ones, started after 23 February, are suspended for the same period.

Likewise, the ban on dismissals for objective justified reason as per article 7, Law 604/1966 has been extended for the same period, with the specification that dismissals for objective justified reason in progress are suspended.

No clarification was provided regarding the window of time that was created due to the delay in issuing Decree Law 34/2020 (19 May 2020) compared to the expiration of the original ban, 16 May, contained in the Decree Law 34/2020: it may be only subject to legal interpretations, despite the fact that it does not seem possible for the non-retroactivity of the laws to be exceeded.

Lastly, it stated that the Relaunch Decree Law introduced paragraph 1 bis that gives an employer who performed a dismissal for objective justified reason during the period from 23 February to 17 March 2020 the right to revoke the termination at any time as long as request is made at the same time for redundancy fund treatment starting from the date the dismissal became effective. In that case, the employment is considered restored without interruption and without charges or penalties for the employer.

Extension or renewal of fixed-term contracts: exception to art. 21 of Legislative Decree 81/2015

In terms of fixed-term contracts, INL provided explanations concerning the exception to art. 21 of the Legislative Decree 81/2015 introduced by the Relaunch Decree Law, which permits the renewal or extension of fixed-term employment contracts existing on 23 February 2020 until 30 August 2020, including in the absence of the reasons governed by art. 19, paragraph 1, Legislative Degree 81/2015.

With the note in question, INL explained that, for the purposes of “reasonless” extension or renewal as per the provision contained in the Relaunch Decree Law, two conditions must be met:

  • the fixed-term contract must be in existence at 23 February 2020 (so contracts signed for the first time after 23 February are excluded from this exception);
  • the extended or renewed employment contract must be terminated by 30 August 2020.

It is still obviously possible to provide for a “reasonless” extension even after 30 August as long as it does not exceed a period of 12 months.

Other related insights:

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

12 Oct 2026

“AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment” – IBA Conference 2026

At the IBA Annual Conference 2026 in Copenhagen, our Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca moderated a panel on one of the most pressing challenges facing employers today: the…

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…