La crisi del lavoro al rientro dall’emergenza pandemica. La risposta giudiziaria e i suoi eccessi
di Laura Foglia
Abstract
L’autrice nel commentare il Decreto del Tribunale di Firenze che dichiara l’antisindacalità ex art. 28, L. n. 300/1970 della condotta aziendale individuata nell’inadempimento dell’obbligo di preventiva informazione delle organizzazioni sindacali ai sensi del CCNL applicabile giunge a ritenere la decisione non condivisibile, dovendosi riconoscere valore derogatorio alla disposizione contenuta nei medesimi accordi per cui l’avvio della procedura di licenziamento collettivo e del relativo esame congiunto con le organizzazioni sindacali ai sensi della Legge n. 223 del 1991 e della Legge n. 428 del 1990, nonché del D.P.R. n. 218 del 2000 cui l’Azienda ha regolarmente dato corso sospende e assorbe i distinti obblighi di informazione preventiva.
The essay is focused on the analysis of a particular case of a “juridically nonexistent” dismissal, which is the one ordered by a Contractor in case of illicit tender contract. As long as this dismissal is ordered a non domino, the Client, who has been sued by an employee claiming for the statement of an employement relationship, cannot take advantage of it pursuant to Art. no. 38, par. 3, Legislative Decree no. 81/2015 and Art. no 29, par. 3-bis, Legislative Decree no. 276/2003 (please, see also Art. no. 80-bis, Law Decree no. 34/2020). Therefore, the factual The author in commenting on the Decree of the Court of Florence which declares anti-unionism pursuant to art. 28, L. no. 300/1970 of the corporate conduct identified in the non-fulfillment of the obligation of prior information of the trade unions pursuant to the applicable CCNL comes to believe the decision cannot be shared, having to recognize a derogating value from the provision contained in the same agreements for which the initiation of the procedure of collective dismissal and related joint examination with trade unions pursuant to Law no. 223 of 1991 and of the Law no. 428 of 1990, as well as of the D.P.R. n. 218 of 2000 which the Company has regularly initiated suspends and absorbs the distinct obligations of prior information.relationship between the claiming employee and the sued Client has never been interrupted.