Supreme Court: the workers’ safety representative (i.e. “Rappresentante dei lavoratori per la sicurezza” or “RLS”) has a wider right to criticize and express opinions than an employee

With Order No. 23850/2024, published on 5 September 2024, the Supreme Court clarified that employees who also act as workers’ safety representatives (“RLS”) are entitled to the same protection as trade unionists. This means that “RLSs” can use harsher tones than those “normally allowed” for an employee, because they stand on an equal footing with the employer. There are, of course, limits to this in terms of respect for fairness and human dignity, which, when crossed by derogatory and unproven statements, justify the employer’s disciplinary action. 

The case 

An employer sanctioned an employee, in charge of employee safety, with a ten-day suspension from work because his statements, which appeared on an online information portal and in a local newspaper, concerning data on accidents to travelers due to door defects and fatal accidents at work, exceeded the limits of the right to criticism and moderation. 

Specifically, the employee had expressed solidarity declarations regarding the non-reinstatement of a group of workers, describing that conduct as an «anti-democratic and anti-union shortcut». 

The employee contested the disciplinary sanction, which was confirmed at first instance and overturned on appeal. 

The decision of the Supreme Court 

The Supreme Court confirmed the appellate court’s decision, concluding that even harsh criticism of the employer’s activities, when expressed by a person who represents the collective interests of the workers against those of the employer, such as the “RLS” in this case, cannot be the subject of disciplinary sanctions. The ruling states that “by including the role of the RLS in the area of protected subjects, such as trade union members representing collective interests, the expression of solidarity with other workers with a general trade union political value is part of the constitutionally protected right of criticism and the right to express ideas”. 

All this, of course, should always be done within the limits of formal correctness and the protection of the human person, so much that “only when these limits are exceeded by the attribution to the employer company or its managers of openly dishonorable qualities and unproven disparaging references, can the employee’s conduct be legitimately sanctioned by disciplinary measures”. 

Other related insights: 

• Legitimate dismissal of Workers’ Safety Representative (RLS) found to be using daily trade union leave for private purposes
• The right to criticize and libel