With the approval of the bill 1167-B in the Senate, the Government allows the Italian employers to make a quantum leap in the dismantling of workers' rights: more than a counter-reform, it is a real counter-revolution, albeit conducted on the sly. The attack this time takes the form of a very long text that confers “Delegations to the Government in matters of strenuous work, the reorganization of entities, leave, expectations and permits, social safety nets, employment services, employment incentives, apprenticeships, female employment, as well as measures against undeclared work and provisions on public employment and labor disputes”.
In short, more than anything else, but it is obvious that the heart of the design is made up of labor standards: let's look at them in order.
General clauses, certified contracts, arbitration clauses: the perfect crime.
Judges are commanded not to interfere in the "technical, organizational and production assessments that are the responsibility of the employer or client": they should therefore limit themselves to assessing the formal aspect of the employer's work, without considering the merits of the issues. The regulation expresses an already existing principle, but which here finds further reinforcement with the specification of its fields of application: "establishment of an employment relationship, exercise of employer powers, transfer of company and withdrawal". In short, in all the events involving an employment relationship, from its inception to its termination, the employer is ... master.
The jurisdiction of the judges is considerably reduced even if the (individual) employment contract has been "certified" by the parties. This certification is not in itself a novelty: the instrument was also envisaged by the "Biagi law" but had never found, until now, widespread application, also due to the fact that the contract, although certified, could still be challenged before the Court. And here's the idea: to cancel upstream and in advance the possibility for the worker to go to a judge, allowing the parties (i.e. the employer, who is the only one with an interest - and what an interest!) to insert in the individual contract, through the instrument of certification, an "arbitration clause" on the basis of which any dispute concerning the employment relationship will be judged and decided by arbitrators instead of by the Court.
The difference, to the detriment of the workers, is colossal: on the one hand, the arbitration is expensive and the expenses will have to be upfront by half by each of the parties. It will follow that in many cases the worker will give up in advance to assert his rights, not being able to afford to pay or at least not wanting to risk losing money in case of failure. Ordinary proceedings in Court, on the contrary, are free and often, as a matter of practice, the worker who loses the case is not sentenced to pay the employer's legal fees. On the other hand, in the event of an unfavorable award, the possibilities of appeal are extremely reduced: the protection of the worker is also greatly weakened in this respect. The arbitrators - in the event of a request from the parties - will also be able to decide "according to equity", and therefore without necessity
