With its ruling no. 10037\/15, the Court of Cassation returned to make a decision on the issue of psychological harassment and the relative liability of the employer. The Supreme Court connects the employer’s liability for injury from psychological harassment performed by an employee to a form of negligence due to the fact that no measures were adopted aimed at eliminating the performance of the harassing initiatives. The employer’s liability is not excluded in the case where such initiatives were performed by an employer with a higher rank than the victim. The Supreme Court underlined that the duration and reiteration of the persecutory actions, combined with the procedures used by the higher-ranking manager to implement the harassing conduct, were such as to consider that the employer was aware of the hostile initiatives that the victim was subjected to. The phenomenon of psychological harassment has been the subject of many studies and research both from a medical-scientific standpoint, as well as from a strictly legal viewpoint. In terms of the Italian Civil Code, the incidence of harassment on the job is essentially due to violation of article 2087 of the Italian Civil Code. This provision forbids the employer from directly engaging in conduct that is injurious to the psychological and physical well-being of employees, but the employer also has the obligation to prevent, discourage and neutralise any harassing behaviour undertaken by higher ranking employees, people in charge or other employees in performing jobs. In light of the above, we feel it would be useful to stipulate company and\/or territorial agreements, including on a voluntary basis, with codes of conduct and ethics as a guide for the conduct of employers – including based on the principles of social responsibility -, of workers and all involved subjects, in order to improve the levels of protection provided by law.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
With its ruling no. 10037\/15, the Court of Cassation returned to make a decision on the issue of psychological harassment and the relative liability of the employer. The Supreme Court connects the employer’s liability for injury from psychological harassment performed by an employee to a form of negligence due to the fact that no measures […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[168,175,198],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-26544","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-case-law","category-insights","category-news"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n