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

Ordinance No. 9444 of April 9, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, falls within a legal context of great importance for labor law, particularly concerning fixed-term contracts for seasonal activities. This ruling addresses the issue of the omission of the right of pre-emption for workers, clarifying the employer's responsibilities in cases of subsequent hirings.

Content of the Ordinance and its Importance

The Court ruled on a case where a worker, M. C., challenged a subsequent hiring by the employer, A. S., which occurred without respecting his right of pre-emption. 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 writing the employee's right to be hired on a permanent basis with priority over other workers whom the employer intends to hire in the year following the termination of the employment relationship, pursuant to Article 24, paragraph 4, of Legislative Decree No. 81 of 2015, prevents the employer from invoking the non-occurrence of the condition represented by the worker's manifestation of will to exercise the pre-emption right and, if other workers have been hired, obliges the employer to pay damages pursuant to Article 1218 of the Civil Code.

This summary highlights how the employer is bound to respect the worker's right of pre-emption, under penalty of an obligation to pay damages in case of violation. This represents significant protection for seasonal workers, ensuring them opportunities for job stability.

Practical Implications of the Ruling

The consequences of this Ordinance are manifold and deserve further examination:

• Regulatory Clarity: It represents an important clarification of the provision under Article 24, paragraph 4, of Legislative Decree No. 81 of 2015, which establishes the rights of workers on fixed-term contracts.
• Employer Responsibility: The ruling emphasizes that the failure to indicate the right of pre-emption cannot be used as an excuse to justify non-compliant hirings.
• Worker Protection: The worker's position 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 workers' rights 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 on the matter. It is crucial for employers to take note of these provisions to avoid sanctions and ensure respect for their employees' rights.