{"id":31019,"date":"2026-04-07T11:44:19","date_gmt":"2026-04-07T09:44:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.delucapartners.it\/news-en\/il-confine-tra-riposo-e-inattivita-nella-gestione-dellorario-di-lavoro\/"},"modified":"2026-04-07T11:57:00","modified_gmt":"2026-04-07T09:57:00","slug":"the-boundary-between-rest-and-inactivity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.delucapartners.it\/en\/news-en\/the-boundary-between-rest-and-inactivity\/","title":{"rendered":"The boundary between rest and inactivity in the management of working hours (AIDP – HR Online, 7 aprile 2026 \u2013 Vittorio De Luca, Alesia Hima)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In the organizational language of companies, terms such as \u201cbreaks,\u201d \u201cwaiting times,\u201d or \u201cdowntime\u201d are often used. In operational practice, these expressions tend to be treated almost as synonyms. From a legal standpoint, however, they are far from equivalent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A recent order of the Court of Cassation (No. 1835 of January 27, 2026) draws attention to a distinction that can have very concrete effects on the management of employment relationships: that between rest and inactivity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The difference is not merely terminological. It affects the calculation of working hours, the assessment of any overtime, and, more generally, the soundness of the organizational choices adopted by the company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For this reason, the issue does not concern only legal professionals, but is also directly relevant to those involved in work organization, shift planning, and human resource management.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The decisive criterion: the employee\u2019s availability
<\/strong>The Court of Cassation reiterates a now well-established principle: not all the time during which an employee is not actually performing work can be classified as a rest break.<\/p>\n\n\n\n