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.

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.

The agency for research and legislation “AREL” proposed several amendments to Legislative Decree no. 231/01 concerning the Company administrative responsibility.

The Court of Cassation, with sentence n. 12596/2010, pointed out that in case of administrative sanctions imposed by the Inspective Labour Department (so called “Ispettorato del Lavoro”) for not registered employment relationships, the application of legality and non-retroactivity principles as well as the prohibition of analogical application of law requires the subjection of the unlawful behaviour to the law discipline applicable at the moment on which the offence took place;