Salaries: transparency among colleagues becomes mandatory — for equal roles, comparisons between pay slips are now allowed (Corriere Della Sera – Vittorio De Luca, 13 January 2026)
Transposition of the directive by 6 June. Europe says no to the Netherlands, which had requested a postponement. Talks between social partners and the Ministry of Labour
Italy has until 6 June to transpose the EU directive on pay transparency. To the Netherlands, which had asked for a delay, Brussels responded on 18 December with a firm “no.”
Reversal of the burden of proof
Everyone will be entitled to ask what the average pay is of colleagues—women and men—performing work of equal value. The directive provides for a reversal of the burden of proof: it will be up to companies to explain the reasons for pay that is lower than the average. In the event of a dispute, the directive envisages an internal company conciliation mechanism involving trade unions and equality bodies. If this proves insufficient, the matter may be taken to court.
The Ministry of Labour is working on transposing the directive through a legislative decree, with technical support from Inapp. A first meeting has been held with trade unions, followed by a second with all social partners. “We expect that associations like ours, which have direct knowledge of these issues, will also be consulted,” says Vincenzo Di Marco, Lombardy vice-president of Aidp, the association of HR directors.
Positions at the Ministry of Labour negotiating table
At the first meeting of the discussion table at the Ministry of Labour, Confindustria—aligned with the other employers’ associations—put forward two requests. The first was to uphold everything already set out in sectoral collective agreements regarding job grades and roles of equal value. The second was to enhance conciliation procedures in order to minimise litigation before the courts. Overall, these are requests with which the trade unions also largely agree.
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…
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…
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…
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…
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…
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…