Judgment No. 10571 of 2024 and the Limit on Fixed-Term Contracts in Public Employment

The recent order No. 10571 of April 18, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers an important reflection on fixed-term contracts in the public sector. In particular, the judgment clarifies that in contracted public employment, the succession of fixed-term contracts cannot exceed the limit of thirty-six months, under penalty of the repetition being considered abusive. This principle is fundamental for the protection of workers' rights and for ensuring stability in the public labor market.

Context of the Judgment

The case in question pitted R. (S. A.) against M. (V. S.) regarding the legitimacy of fixed-term contracts. The Court of Appeal of Trieste, with its decision of December 6, 2018, had already established that the repetition of contracts beyond the limit set by the regulations should be considered abusive, regardless of whether the hires occurred through distinct public competitions.

The Ruling's Headnote

In general. In contracted public employment, in the event of a succession of fixed-term contracts, the limit of thirty-six months of total duration applies, after which repetition is to be considered abusive, it being irrelevant that the fixed-term hiring occurred, from time to time, at the conclusion of distinct public competitions.

This headnote clearly highlights the legislator's intent to limit the use of fixed-term contracts, to prevent them from becoming the norm rather than the exception. The reference regulation is Legislative Decree No. 368 of 2001, which in Article 5, paragraph 4, establishes precisely the thirty-six-month limit. This provision serves both as a deterrent for public administrations and a safeguard for workers, preventing situations of prolonged precariousness.

Legal and Regulatory Implications

The implications of this judgment are manifold and concern both public administrations and workers. Among the main consequences are:

• Strengthening job stability in the public sector.
• Limiting excessive flexibility by administrations in personnel management.
• Regulatory clarity for workers, who can see their rights protected in cases of fixed-term contracts.

In a European context, compliance with such limits aligns with EU directives aimed at ensuring fair working conditions and the protection of workers' rights. Judgment No. 10571 of 2024 therefore fits into a broader framework of labor protection, not only at the national but also at the European level.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 10571 of 2024 represents an important step forward in the regulation of fixed-term contracts in public employment. It confirms the need to respect the thirty-six-month limit, promoting greater stability for workers and more responsible management by administrations. It is crucial for jurists and legal professionals to continue monitoring the evolution of such regulations to ensure correct application and protection of workers' rights in the public context.