In brief
This publication features the latest developments in Italy's employment sector.
Key takeaways
- Case law developments
- Dismissal voided if an employer makes an error when calculating duration of protected sick leave
- Employee’s activities during sick leave did not justify dismissal
- Dismissal for just cause due to delays causing loss of a client
- A dismissal notified to an employee’s ordinary email address was valid
In more detail
Case law developments
Dismissal voided if an employer makes an error when calculating duration of protected sick leave
An employee was dismissed after being on sick leave for the maximum protected period (in Italian ‘comporto’) provided by law and the relevant collective bargaining areement (CBA). A subsequent check by public labour authorities assessed that, at the time of dismissal, the limit had not in fact been reached, as part of the absences were later classified as work related injuries which fall outside comporto. Consequently, a local court declared the dismissal null and void, ordering forced reinstatement.
Employee’s activities during sick leave did not justify dismissal
In a recent ruling, a local court ruled that when an employee is on sick leave due to an illness that is psychiatric in nature, engaging in physical activities that are not especially strenuous or that fall within normal daily life is not, in itself, incompatible with the employee’s recovery. In such cases it is for the employer to show that that such activities unreasonably prejudiced the employee’s physical and psychological recovery. In the case at hand, the dismissal for cause of an employee who had been filmed while moving house during sick leave was considered null and void, since said activity was not incompatible with recovery from the certified condition.
Dismissal for just cause due to delays causing loss of a client
The Supreme Court ruled that there are grounds for dismissal for just cause when an employee arrives late at work, fails to meet deadlines and systematically breaches technical instructions, all of which negatively affects an employer's reputation with loss of clients.
A dismissal notified to an employee’s ordinary email address was valid
In a recent case, the Supreme Court confirmed that a dismissal notice sent to an employee’s ordinary email address can be valid. Under Italian law, a dismissal must be communicated in writing. However, even if the applicable CBA requires a specific method of delivery, such as certified email (PEC), failure to use that method does not automatically invalidate the dismissal.
In the case at hand, an employer sent the dismissal letter from the company’s certified email account (PEC) to an employee’s ordinary email address; the employee received the letter and this fact alone is sufficient, according to the Supreme Court, to consider the dismissal properly notified.