Categories: Insights, Practice


26 Feb 2018

Remote control of workers: additional operating provisions from the Labour Inspectorate

In Circular Letter no. 5 of 19 February 2018, the National Labour Inspectorate provided further operating provisions on the “new” Article 4, Workers’ Statute. In particular, the Inspectorate specified that, due to actual reasons of control, a video surveillance system may also monitor the workers without any limitations as to the camera angle, the blacking out of the face of the operator or the specific indication of the position of the cameras and their exact number. This is so because oftentimes the conditions of places and the positions of merchandise or production plants is subject to continuous changes in the course of time. Only for systems that start operating when workers are present, observance of the principles of proportionality, fairness and not excess set out in the Privacy Code should also be verified. According to the Labour Inspectorate, the use of video surveillance systems based on IP technology can also be allowed; remote access to these in real time must be authorized only in exceptional cases, while access to recorded images shall be traced in order to allow storage of “log-ins” for a period of at least six months. Regarding the collection and processing of biometric data, the Labour Inspectorate has accepted the indications of the Italian Data Protection Authority, setting out that these devices are legitimate only if they are considered indispensable tools to perform the work as they aim at limiting access to “sensitive” areas or allowing use of hazardous machinery only by qualified personnel. The new provisions of the Labour Inspectorate, even if they remove many doubts, basically further prove that the application of the matter at hand is uncertain and that it is necessary to make personalized inquiries into each specific case.

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…