February 4, 2026
Social security and contributions
Failure to pay contributions: the judge must rule on the damage even before retirement
Supreme Court, Labor Section

A worker who had worked for over forty years at a professional firm without proper social security registration took legal action to obtain recognition of the employment relationship, back pay, and severance pay (TFR). On appeal, the court confirmed the continuity of the employment relationship, even with changes in the firm’s ownership, and ordered the heirs to pay the amounts due.

At the level of the Supreme Court, the request for damages due to unpaid contributions was examined, noting that the lower court had not ruled on this point.

The decision clarifies that failure to pay contributions can give rise to compensable damages even before reaching retirement age. The worker can claim a general compensation for the harm caused by the irregular contributions, considered potentially prejudicial behavior.

In such claims, only the employer is liable for non-payment of contributions; it is not necessary to include the social security institution in the proceedings unless a pension is being requested.

February 6, 2026
Temporary work
Repeated temporary contracts for 29 months: no temporariness, indefinite employment starts
Supreme Court, Labor Section

A worker employed by the same company under four successive fixed-term temporary contracts over approximately 29 months went to court seeking nullification of the fixed-term limits and recognition of a permanent employment relationship with the user company.

The court granted the request; the Court of Appeal confirmed, emphasizing the prolonged assignments, constant tasks at the same workplace, and absence of specific justification from the company. The company appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court rejected the appeal, reaffirming that temporariness is an essential requirement for temporary work. Even without an explicit prohibition on repetition, extended use of a worker in the same company can constitute fraud on the law when it circumvents the purpose of temporary work.

In this case, uninterrupted employment for 29 months, performing the same tasks, and the specific selection of the worker were considered indicators of misuse. Consequently, a permanent employment relationship was established with the user company, with an order to pay compensation.

February 1, 2026
Social security and contributions
APE Social: re-employment for less than six months does not affect unemployment status
Supreme Court, Labor Section

A worker applied to the court to obtain recognition of the right to APE Social, claiming to meet the eligibility criteria at the time of the administrative request and seeking payment of the benefit until retirement.

The court rejected the request, considering the reason for termination of the last employment decisive, which had ended due to expiration of a fixed-term intermittent contract. The Court of Appeal, however, ruled in the worker’s favor, considering the previous dismissal and recognizing that the subsequent employment of less than six months only suspended, not ended, the state of unemployment.

The Supreme Court confirmed this approach. Eligibility for APE Social refers to the last stable or long-term employment relationship. Short-term re-employment does not eliminate unemployment status but merely suspends it.

In summary, the Court established that brief periods of re-employment do not prevent access to the benefit, avoiding penalization of temporary work experiences.

January 26, 2026
Maternity and paternity leave
Parental leave up to 14 years: new limits for employees from 2026
INPS

INPS issued initial operational guidance on the extension of parental leave. The change affects employees: for events from January 1, 2026, parental leave can be used within the first fourteen years of the child’s life, rather than twelve as before. In cases of adoption or foster care, the limit is fourteen years from the child’s entry into the family.

The rules remain unchanged for parents under the separate management system (Gestione separata), whose limit is still twelve years, and for self-employed workers, who can use leave within the first year of the child’s life or entry into the family.

INPS also updated the online procedure for submitting applications. If it was not possible to submit requests in advance between January 1, 2026, and the system update, applications can be submitted retroactively for already used periods.

This extension significantly improves the work-life balance for employees and requires careful monitoring of requests by companies, including for older children.

January 7, 2026
Mobbing
Mobbing: compensation only if a persecutory plan is proven
Supreme Court, Labor Section

A worker sued the employer claiming repeated harassing behavior: multiple disciplinary warnings, exclusion from assignments, and progressive reduction of duties. The worker sought compensation for mobbing-related damage, citing harm to health and professional skills.

The court rejected the claim, finding no evidence of a unified persecutory intent; the Court of Appeal confirmed, noting that the incidents, while conflicting, were heterogeneous and partly justified by organizational needs.

The Supreme Court reiterated that mobbing requires proof of multiple systematic and prolonged acts with a unified persecutory intent aimed at marginalization. Without such evidence, individual acts may be evaluated for illegality but do not constitute compensable mobbing. The burden of proof lies entirely with the worker, including the causal link between the conduct and the alleged damage.

February 12, 2026
Null dismissal
Harmful work environment and dismissal: reinstatement if absence is a reaction to employer non-compliance
Supreme Court, Labor Section

This case concerns the challenge of a dismissal for alleged unjustified absences. The worker had previously been dismissed and reinstated due to retaliatory nature of the termination. After reinstatement, she again was absent, citing inadequate climatic and sanitary conditions. Both the trial court and Court of Appeal found the second dismissal unjustified and retaliatory, ordering reinstatement.

The Supreme Court confirmed that in cases of unsafe conditions, the worker must demonstrate the existence of the employment relationship and a concrete risk factor; the employer must show that all preventive measures were taken. Exposure to potentially harmful conditions, endangering physical integrity or dignity, constitutes employer non-compliance.

In this context, the worker’s absence may be a legitimate reaction, and dismissal for such conduct may be considered retaliatory, entitling reinstatement.

January 28, 2026
Social safety nets
Social safety nets 2026: updated maximum amounts for CIG, NASpI, DIS-COLL, and ISCRO
INPS

INPS published the updated maximum amounts for wage supplementation schemes and unemployment benefits, adjusted for ISTAT index changes, effective January 1, 2026.

For CIGO, CIGS, CISOA, and FIS and bilateral fund supplements, the monthly maximum is €1,423.69 gross (€1,340.56 net). For construction and stonework sectors, seasonal weather adjustments increase it by 20% up to €1,708.44 gross.

Maximums for credit and cooperative credit funds and the tax collection fund are also updated.

For unemployment benefits, the reference salary for NASpI and DIS-COLL is €1,456.72; the monthly maximum is €1,584.70.

For ISCRO, the reference income is €12,749.18; monthly benefits range from €255.53 to €817.69.

The allowance for socially useful work is €707.19 per month.

These updated thresholds directly impact costs and protections during suspension or termination of employment and require companies and advisors to update their parameters.