Commentary on Ordinance No. 9444 of 2024: Right of Precedence in Fixed-Term Contracts

Ordinance No. 9444 of April 9, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, is situated within a legal context of great importance for labor law, particularly concerning fixed-term contracts for seasonal activities. This provision addresses the issue of the failure to indicate the right of precedence for workers, clarifying the responsibilities of the employer in the case of subsequent hirings.

The Content of the Ordinance and Its Importance

The Court ruled on a case in which a worker, M. C., contested a subsequent hiring by the employer, A. S., which occurred without respecting his right of precedence. Specifically, the Ordinance establishes that:

In general. In the case of fixed-term employment contracts for the performance of seasonal activities, the failure to indicate in the written document the employee's right to be hired on a permanent basis with precedence over other workers that the employer intends to hire in the year following the termination of the relationship, pursuant to Article 24, paragraph 4, of Legislative Decree No. 81 of 2015, prevents the employer from opposing the non-occurrence of the condition represented by the worker's expression of intent to exercise precedence and, if other workers have been hired, obliges him to compensate for damages pursuant to Article 1218 of the Civil Code.

This maxim highlights how the employer is bound to respect the worker's right of precedence, under penalty of being obligated to compensate in the event of a violation. This represents an important safeguard for seasonal workers, ensuring them opportunities for job stability.

The Practical Implications of the Ruling

The consequences of this Ordinance are multiple and deserve further exploration:

  • Regulatory clarity: It represents an important clarification on the norm provided in Article 24, paragraph 4, of Legislative Decree No. 81 of 2015, which establishes the rights of workers with fixed-term contracts.
  • Employer responsibility: The ruling emphasizes that the failure to indicate the right of precedence cannot be used as an excuse to justify non-compliant hirings.
  • Worker protection: The position of the worker is strengthened, as they can rely on a clear right protected by law.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 9444 of 2024 represents a significant step in protecting the rights of workers within the framework of fixed-term contracts, particularly for seasonal activities. The ruling not only offers greater interpretative clarity but also establishes an important precedent for future disputes in this area. It is essential that employers take note of these provisions to avoid sanctions and ensure the respect of their employees' rights.

Bianucci Law Firm