April 24, 2025
Employee monitoring
CCTV in the workplace: dismissal is void without proper notice
Supreme Court, Labor Section
A female employee was dismissed for taking company merchandise, based on footage from CCTV cameras installed in the workplace. The employer believed that, since the cameras were set up to protect company assets, the footage could be used for disciplinary purposes.
The Supreme Court confirmed the dismissal was void, rejecting the employer’s appeal. The Court reiterated that even when cameras are used for defensive purposes, employees must be properly informed about their presence and how the collected data will be used. Without such information, footage cannot be used for disciplinary proceedings.
The ruling emphasizes that the balance between protecting company assets and safeguarding employee rights must always include compliance with transparency and privacy rules.
March 3, 2025
Wages and benefits
Meal vouchers are not owed during vacation periods
Court of Appeal of Naples
A group of employees brought a case against their employer, seeking a recalculation of holiday pay that included equalization allowances, shift allowances, bonuses, and meal vouchers. The trial court upheld the claims. The company appealed, arguing, among other things, that meal vouchers should not be included in holiday pay.
The Court of Appeal sided with the employer on this point, stating that meal vouchers are a form of welfare benefit linked to the employment relationship only on an occasional basis. As such, they are not part of core remuneration and are excluded from holiday pay.
April 5, 2025
Severance, notice, and termination benefits
Severance pay (TFR) in payslip: monthly advance is unlawful, says Labor Inspectorate
National Labor Inspectorate (INL)
A company was reported to the Labor Inspectorate for paying employees their accrued severance (TFR) in monthly installments through the payslip, a practice continued even after the experimental regime provided by the 2015 Stability Law ended. A clarification was requested on whether this practice was lawful.
The National Labor Inspectorate, with input from the Ministry, confirmed that TFR is a form of deferred compensation meant to provide economic support upon contract termination. Advances are only allowed under specific legal circumstances and only for already accrued amounts, not for future monthly installments.
If these conditions are not met, the advances are considered ordinary wages and are therefore subject to social contributions. Inspectors are instructed to issue orders requiring proper accrual of TFR when unlawful advances are detected.
April 24, 2025
Whistleblowing
Whistleblowing and dismissal: enhanced protection also applies to Covid-related cases
Supreme Court, Labor Section
An employee was dismissed after reporting alleged violations of Covid-19 regulations by the company. The matter escalated to the Supreme Court, where the employee claimed the dismissal was retaliatory and linked to his whistleblowing activities.
The Court upheld the employee’s claim, recognizing that his reports fell under whistleblower protection, even though they concerned breaches of anti-Covid measures. According to the Court, employees who report serious legal or regulatory violations, including those related to health and safety, are entitled to enhanced protection from retaliatory dismissal.
The ruling reinforces the importance of maintaining a safe and compliant workplace and of protecting those who report violations.
April 4, 2025
Apprenticeship
Invalid apprenticeship without training: contract becomes open-ended from the start
Court of Pisa
A female worker had been hired under a professional apprenticeship contract by a bakery, working as a sales assistant. Two years later, she had received no training and had never been assigned a mentor. The only course she attended was a one-month online program, which led to personal attacks from the employer due to her absence.
The Court ruled in favor of the worker. It emphasized that apprenticeship contracts are mixed-purpose agreements combining work and training. Specifically, the professional apprenticeship is meant to develop skills through on-the-job learning.
In this case, the employer failed to implement any training plan. The employer’s inaction wasn’t justified by the Covid emergency, especially since the option to extend training under the “Relaunch Decree” wasn’t used.
Therefore, the apprenticeship contract was deemed null and the employment relationship considered an open-ended standard contract from the beginning.
April 3, 2025
Probationary dismissal
Unsigned probation agreement: dismissal is not at-will
Supreme Court, Labor Section
An employee challenged his dismissal, claiming the probation agreement was invalid because it lacked the employer’s signature. Lower courts dismissed the claim, stating that the termination was valid under the rules for probationary periods.
The Supreme Court overturned the ruling, clarifying that probation clauses require written form “ad substantiam” (as an essential formality), and that a lack of employer signature renders the agreement void from the outset. While submitting the unsigned agreement in court might substitute the signature, this only applies going forward (ex nunc) and doesn’t retroactively correct the defect.
As a result, the employment relationship must be treated as an open-ended contract from the start, meaning that any dismissal or resignation must follow the usual formal and substantive requirements, with full worker protection.
February 4, 2025
Individual dismissal
Assisted negotiation does not suspend the deadline to challenge dismissal
Court of Bologna
An employee contested his dismissal, claiming it was discriminatory and retaliatory. After an out-of-court settlement attempt, he initiated an assisted negotiation procedure. The employer argued that the judicial challenge came too late—beyond the 180-day limit.
The Bologna Court upheld the employer’s objection, clarifying that assisted negotiation does not suspend the statutory 180-day deadline to file a lawsuit against dismissal. Only conciliation or arbitration proceedings, as expressly provided by law, can suspend this term.
The decision highlights that while assisted negotiation is a legitimate tool in labor disputes, it does not affect statutory time limits for dismissal challenges. Therefore, the claim was ruled inadmissible, although the court waived legal costs due to the complexity of the issue.
