DLP Insights

The Court of Cassation stated that the employer is entitled to refuse to hire a disabled worker whether if the latter has an employment status different from the one required by the employer itself or just a “similar” status, i.e. not exactly equal to the one requested.

The Ministry of Labour, answering to questioning no. 20/10, confirmed that, in case of transfer of business, the social security contribution’s reliefs set forth under art. 8, par. 9, L. no. 407/90 will automatically pass from the transferor to the transferee for the residual part and until the expiration.

INPS, with memorandum no. 99/10, clarified the operating instructions to be applied to the new discipline of the abroad detachment of employee, as introduced by the EU Regulations no. 883/04 and 987/09 became effective from 1 May 2010.

INPS, with message no. 17899/10, specified that the indemnity due to the employees enjoying the extraordinary leave for the assistance of persons with heavy disabled, shall be paid by the employer, and then charged to INPS, even if the employee of the private sector is enrolled as a member of a different social security institute.

The Court of Cassation pointed out that the Company which changes the employment status of the apprentice employee immediately after the advanced conversion of its apprenticeship agreement into an open-term employment agreement, will not be entitled to enjoy the social security contribution’s facilities (i.e. one year of facilitated social security contribution), provided by law in such a case.