The Right to Paid Breaks According to Ordinance No. 8626 of 2024: An In-Depth Analysis
The recent Ordinance No. 8626 of April 2, 2024, has raised important issues regarding the right to paid breaks and compensatory rest for workers, particularly for employees of private security institutions. This provision clarifies fundamental legislative and jurisprudential aspects, shedding light on the responsibilities of both workers and employers in the context of work breaks.
The Regulatory Framework
The right to paid breaks is established by Article 8 of Legislative Decree No. 66 of 2003, which stipulates that workers are entitled to a break during their work shift. Specifically, for employees of private security institutions, the national collective labor agreement (c.c.n.l.) provides specific guidance on this right. The ordinance under review emphasizes the importance of this right, stating that in case of failure to take the break, the worker is entitled to compensatory rest.
Burden of Proof and Responsibilities
One of the most significant aspects of the ordinance concerns the burden of proof. A worker seeking to assert their right to compensatory rest must prove that they worked for more than six consecutive hours without taking a paid break. This constitutes a foundational fact for their legal claim.
- The worker must demonstrate prolonged work performance without a break.
- The employer, conversely, bears the burden of proving that they allowed the break to be taken or granted compensatory rest as an alternative.
Right to break pursuant to Art. 8 Legislative Decree No. 66 of 2003 - Failure to take break - C.c.n.l. for employees of private security institutions - Right to compensatory rest - Burden of proof - Constitutive and extinctive facts - Allocation. In the case of failure to take the paid break provided for by Art. 8, paragraph 1, Legislative Decree No. 66 of 2003, and, for employees of private security institutions, regulated by Art. 74 of the c.c.n.l. of May 2, 2006, and April 8, 2013, as this provides for the right to compensatory rest due to the impossibility of taking the break during the work shift, even with the alternative methods contemplated therein, the worker seeking recognition of this right has the burden of alleging and proving, as a constitutive fact, the performance of daily activity exceeding six consecutive hours without taking the paid break, while the employer bears the burden of proving the extinctive fact of having taken it according to the aforementioned alternative methods or the compensatory rest provided in substitution.
Conclusions
In conclusion, Ordinance No. 8626 of 2024 represents an important clarification regarding workers' rights. It reiterates the significance of the right to paid breaks and compensatory rest, highlighting the balance of the burden of proof between the worker and the employer. Awareness of these rights and duties is fundamental for all workers, particularly those operating in specific sectors such as private security, where work dynamics can be complex.
