Categories: Insights, Publications


16 Dec 2018

Poor performance due to repeated sick leaves does not legitimize dismissal (Il Quotidiano del Lavoro de Il Sole 24 Ore, 17 December 2018 – Alberto De Luca, Petra D’Andrea)

Using a peculiar argument, the Court of Cassation, with judgment no. 31763 of 7 December 2018 ruled on the possibility to consider the inconvenience caused by continuous and repeated sick leaves as grounds for dismissal for a justified objective reason.

The case at hand revolves around the dismissal served on an employee who had been on sick leave for short although repeated periods of time (157 days) – without however exceeding the protected period set out in the applicable National Collective Bargaining Agreement – given that such circumstance had negatively affected the company. The judgment of the court of first degree – which had sustained the worker’s claim – was initially reversed by the Court of Appeal, which noted that the inconvenience caused, also in consideration of the fact that the employer was a public urban transportation provider, could very well legitimize dismissal, also making reference to a recent and peculiar approach of the Court of Cassation in this regard (Court of Cassation, judgement no. 18678/2014).

Called to express its opinion on the matter, the Court of Cassation decided, nonetheless, to adopt a different approach, quashing the judgment of the Court of Appeal and noting that the non-performance of work by an employee on sick leave (during a fixed period of time) is provided for and protected by the civil code, with a view to balancing the conflicting interests of the employer (in retaining only active workers) and the worker (in using an adequate period of time to heal without losing the job).
This peculiar type of guarantee wanes only when the statutory protected period, according to the law and the collective agreement, is exceeded, and therefore the retention of the job is no longer an obligation for the employer.

 

 

Click here to read the full version of the note to the judgement.

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…