Categories: Insights, Publications · News, Publications

Tag: Remote working, smart working


17 Apr 2026

Criminal penalties are being introduced for those who fail to protect remote workers (The Platform, 17 April 2026 – Vittorio De Luca e Martina De Angeli)

The provision amends Legislative Decree 81/2008 by introducing a new Article 3, paragraph 7-bis, which makes compliance with safety obligations conditional upon the delivery—at least annually—of a written notice to employees working remotely (more commonly known as smart working) and to the Workers’ Safety Representative (RLS). This document must be comprehensive and consistent with the Risk Assessment Document (DVR) and must include information on general risks, specific risks, technostress, the use of display screen equipment, and risks related to commuting.

An obligation that already existed, but without teeth.


Taking stock of the practical impact of this change is Martina De Angeli, senior associate and practice leader at De Luca & Partners. “This obligation to provide the notice at least annually was already предусмотрed by Law 81 of 2017, which regulates agile (remote) work.”

In practice, the issue was that, without explicit consequences, many companies tended to push this requirement to the bottom of their priority list. “Today there has been a bit of resonance,” De Angeli observes, “because in practice it was an obligation that always remained a low priority compared to signing agreements and notifying the authorities.” The firm has always done its best to raise awareness among companies about this obligation and therefore believes its clients are compliant. But the message for those who have not yet adapted is clear.

Continue reading the full version published on The Platform

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 Sep 2026

Company files deleted from the PC: dismissal lawful even without proof of damage

The matter arises from the disciplinary dismissal of an employee performing general secretarial duties who, upon returning the company computer following a change in her duties, handed back…

1 Sep 2026

Overtime work: a summary schedule is not enough, employees must provide strict evidence of both the hours worked and the extent of the overtime performed

With order no. 20700 of 18 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court once again addressed the issue of overtime work, reiterating that employees claiming overtime pay must strictly…

1 Sep 2026

Did you know that… an individual allowance that has remained unchanged for years may become non-absorbable?

In judgment no. 24475 of 5 August 2026, the Employment Section of the Italian Supreme Court confirmed that an individual allowance (i.e. “superminimo”), although normally subject to the…

3 Aug 2026

Pay Transparency: the first requests from employees are starting to arrive (Il Sole 24 Ore, 3 august 2026 – Vittorio De Luca)

Two months after the decree. Since Legislative Decree 96/2026 came into force on 7 June, according to a flash survey conducted by GIDP, 8% of HR directors have…

30 Jul 2026

Corporate controls and data protection: what balance?

A recent judgment of the Court of Pisa, No. 800 of 13 June 2026, addresses a topic of particular interest for companies: the delicate balance between the protection…

30 Jul 2026

Unfair dismissal and reinstatement: the employee must repay the payment in lieu of notice

With order no. 22187 of 28 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether payment in lieu of notice paid to an employee must be…