16 February 2026
Worker Monitoring
GPS for Security Guards: INL Requires Union Agreement or Authorization
INL
The National Labour Inspectorate (INL) has intervened following a request for an opinion regarding whether security firms are required to equip security guards with satellite geolocation systems.
The question arose from sector regulations which, in certain territorial areas, require a communication system capable of ensuring a direct connection between the operations centre and field personnel, with adequate mapping support (so-called geo-referencing). Under the interpretation proposed, this obligation could have brought GPS within the category of tools necessary to perform the work, thereby excluding it from the remote monitoring authorization procedure.
The INL, however, rejected this interpretation. While acknowledging that location systems serve organizational, operational, and safety purposes — enabling timely responses to alarms and greater protection for workers — the Inspectorate clarified that GPS cannot be considered a tool strictly indispensable to the performance of work.
As a result, its installation remains subject to either a union agreement or, in the absence of one, administrative authorization. This ruling aligns with a restrictive approach to remote monitoring and requires companies in the sector to carry out careful preliminary compliance checks.
27 January 2026
Resignations
Unjustified Absence and Constructive Resignation: 15 Days Required (Unless Expressly Provided Otherwise by the Collective Agreement)
Brescia Tribunal
A worker brought a claim before the Tribunal after being deemed to have resigned by his employer following several days of absence. The company had notified the local Labour Inspectorate of the termination of employment as a constructive resignation, without waiting for 15 days to elapse from the start of the absence. The worker, who had in the meantime expressed his willingness to return to work, challenged the legality of the procedure.
The Judge first ruled out that a dismissal imposed by the employer had been proven. Nonetheless, he found the company’s notification of constructive resignation unlawful, as it had been submitted before the statutory time limit had elapsed.
According to the Tribunal, the 15-day period may only be overridden by collective bargaining agreements through a provision expressly referring to the specific case of constructive resignation. It is not sufficient to apply, by analogy, the different time limits set out in the collective agreement for disciplinary purposes in cases of unjustified absence.
In the specific case, the notification had been sent after only six days of absence and, moreover, the worker had offered to resume work within the fifteenth day. The court consequently declared the resignation ineffective and the employment relationship continuous, ordering the company to reinstate the worker and pay the wages accrued from the date of the offer to resume work, amounting to €1,447.92 per month, plus ancillary charges.
24 February 2026
Pay and Benefits
Contract Renewals and Night Work: 5% and 15% Tax on Pay Increases in 2026
Revenue Agency
In the circular under review, the Revenue Agency provides operational guidance on the tax changes introduced for 2026 regarding pay increases arising from contract renewals and supplements for night work, work on public holidays, and shift work.
With regard to increases arising from collective agreement renewals signed between 2024 and 2026, increments paid solely in the year 2026 to private sector workers whose 2025 income did not exceed €33,000 are subject, unless the worker opts out in writing, to a substitute tax of 5%. The benefit applies exclusively to increases forming part of direct remuneration (regular and additional monthly pay) and, for the employer’s portion, indirectly linked components; excluded, among other things, are seniority increments, one-off payments, and severance pay (TFR).
For the same year 2026, a substitute tax of 15% is also provided, up to an annual ceiling of €1,500, on supplements and allowances for night work, work on public holidays, weekly rest days, and shift work, where provided for by the collective agreement. The measure applies to private sector workers whose 2025 income did not exceed €40,000 and is excluded for items that replace ordinary pay.
In both cases, the employer applies the tax automatically, unless the worker expressly opts out, with the possibility of a year-end adjustment in the tax return.
9 February 2026
Social Security and Contributions
Consolidation Between the Separate Management Fund and Professional Pension Funds: INPS Changes Course
INPS
In the circular under review, INPS addresses the consolidation of contributions between the Separate Management Fund and the private compulsory pension funds for professionals, adopting a now well-established judicial interpretation and departing from its previous administrative position.
Specifically, it is now recognized that contributions may be transferred both from the Separate Management Fund to a professional pension fund (outward consolidation) and in the reverse direction (inward consolidation), in accordance with the principles governing the unification of insurance positions.
Regarding consolidation into the Separate Management Fund, INPS clarifies that the cost is calculated using the “percentage-based” contributory method: the rate in force at the date of the application is applied to the remuneration of the preceding twelve months, within the applicable minimum and maximum thresholds. The contributions transferred from the fund of origin are then deducted from the resulting amount.
Consolidated periods retain their chronological position for pension entitlement purposes, but the revaluation of the accrued amount runs from the date of the application. Periods already used for the calculation of a pension are excluded, and partial consolidation is not permitted.
25 February 2026
Social Security and Contributions
2026 Pensions: APE Sociale Extended, Incentives to Defer Retirement, and End of “Opzione Donna”
INPS
INPS has provided initial operational guidance on the pension changes introduced by the 2026 Budget Law, with particular reference to APE Sociale, the social supplement, incentives for deferring retirement, and the repeal of certain early retirement provisions.
First, the APE Sociale pilot scheme is extended until 31 December 2026, with no changes to the current rules, including the incompatibility with employment income, except for the €5,000 annual gross limit for occasional self-employment. The usual application windows remain in place.
From 1 January 2026, the social supplement for pensioners in hardship increases by €20 per month, with a corresponding rise of €260 in the annual income threshold for access to the benefit, which is granted automatically to eligible recipients.
The incentive to defer retirement — already available in other early retirement scenarios — is also extended to employed workers who reach the requirements for standard early retirement by 31 December 2026. The measure allows workers to continue working while benefiting from a financial advantage in their pay packet.
Notably, the provisions allowing the use of supplementary pension funds to reach the threshold amount required for early retirement under the contributory system have been repealed. Neither “Opzione Donna” nor the flexible early retirement scheme has been renewed, with protection limited to those who had already met the requirements before the previous deadlines.
26 February 2026
Dismissal for Just Cause
Anomalous Access to Company Files: No Just Cause Without Proof of Damage
Court of Cassation, Labour Division
A worker challenged the disciplinary dismissal communicated to him by the company for having synchronised, in a single operation, hundreds of company files considered strategically sensitive. The Tribunal annulled the dismissal and ordered reinstatement. The Court of Appeal, while finding the alleged conduct proven, ruled out that the dismissal was proportionate and declared the employment relationship terminated, awarding the worker compensation of 12.5 monthly salaries.
The case involved access to computer systems on a day of annual leave and at an unusual hour, without justification in relation to the worker’s role. However, according to the lower courts, the company had not demonstrated either the actual removal of confidential data, concrete damage, or any appropriative intent.
The Supreme Court upheld the decision, reaffirming that the assessment of proportionality between the alleged conduct and dismissal is a matter for the lower courts and can only be challenged before the Court of Cassation on grounds of serious motivational defects. Where conduct is disciplinarily relevant but unaccompanied by evidence of damage or an irreversible breach of trust, dismissal may be found disproportionate.
The ruling also reaffirms that converting a dismissal for just cause into one for justified subjective reason requires a specific and timely application, adequately raised in the appeal proceedings.
11 February 2026
Illness and Injury
Dissolved Company and Debts to Workers: The Limits of Liability for Shareholders and Liquidators
Court of Cassation, Labour Division
A worker who had been seriously injured on a construction site brought proceedings to obtain compensation for all damages suffered against the employer company, the technical manager, and another employee. In the course of the proceedings, the company was struck off the companies register, and the worker resumed the case against the shareholders and the liquidator.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the claims, holding that shareholders could not be automatically liable for the debts of a dissolved company and declaring certain new claims against the liquidator inadmissible. The worker appealed to the Court of Cassation.
The Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision, reaffirming that the striking-off of a company from the companies register gives rise to a succession: the company’s debts do not cease to exist but are transferred to the shareholders. However, in the case of a limited liability company, shareholders are liable only up to the amount they may have received in the course of liquidation. There is therefore no automatic unlimited liability.
As for the liquidator, liability is tortious in nature and requires specific pleading and proof of negligent conduct that caused harm to the creditor. In the absence of such elements, the claim cannot succeed.
