Judgment No. 10669 of 2024: Solidarity in Work Provision in the Public Administration

The recent judgment No. 10669 of April 19, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, has sparked an important debate regarding the application of the solidarity regime in work provision, particularly in the context of the Public Administration (P.A.). This ruling provides significant clarifications concerning the rights of workers and the responsibilities of the parties involved in a work provision contract.

The Context of the Judgment

The Court examined the case between A. and I., addressing the issue of whether the solidarity regime provided by Article 23, paragraph 3, of Legislative Decree No. 276 of 2003 was applicable in the public sector as well. The judgment confirmed that, in fact, this solidarity regime is applicable, ensuring adequate protection for the provided workers even when the provider is a P.A.

(CONTRACT FOR LABOR SERVICES) Provision - Solidarity regime pursuant to Article 23, paragraph 3, Legislative Decree No. 276 of 2003 - P.A. - Applicability. Regarding work provision, the solidarity regime between the provider and the user as established by Article 23, paragraph 3, of Legislative Decree No. 276 of 2003 is also applicable to the P.A.

Meaning of the Maxim

The maxim above establishes a fundamental principle: the P.A. cannot exempt itself from the responsibilities arising from work provision. In other words, both the provider and the user can be held responsible for any breaches towards the workers. This is a significant step towards the protection of workers' rights, as it ensures that wage and social security rights are respected even in work provision situations.

Practical Implications for Workers and Companies

This judgment has several practical implications:

  • Greater protection for provided workers, who can assert their rights against both the work agency and the P.A.
  • P.As. must pay greater attention to the methods of hiring and managing provided workers to avoid potential disputes.
  • Work provision agencies must ensure compliance with current regulations and contractual provisions.

In this context, judgment No. 10669 represents an important regulatory clarification that strengthens workers' rights and promotes greater accountability from the involved institutions.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 10669 of 2024 provides a clear and defined view on the applicability of the solidarity regime in work provision in the Public Administration. This ruling not only protects workers' rights but also highlights the necessity for P.As. and work agencies to strictly adhere to the legal provisions. It is a step forward towards greater justice in the labor market and adequate protection for all involved workers.

Bianucci Law Firm