Analysis of Judgment No. 11622 of 2024: Socially Useful Work and Subordination

The recent order No. 11622 of April 30, 2024, by the Court of Cassation addresses a highly relevant issue in labor law: the qualification of socially useful work and its implications for remuneration rights. The Court, through an in-depth analysis, has established that even if a work relationship is formally classified as socially useful work, this does not preclude the possibility of recognizing its nature as subordinate employment, with all the resulting consequences for the worker's rights.

Context of the Judgment

The case concerned a worker engaged in public utility activities, whose remuneration was disputed. The Court highlighted that the determination of subordination does not depend solely on the formal classification of the relationship but must consider the concrete modalities of carrying out the work activity. This aspect is crucial for understanding how, even in the absence of an explicit subordinate employment contract, remuneration rights can arise based on the actual working situation.

In general. The formal qualification of the relationship as socially useful work and for public utility does not prevent the determination that, based on the concrete modalities of its performance, it constituted subordinate employment, with the consequent arising, pursuant to art. 2126 of the Civil Code, of the worker's right to remuneration differences, the prescription of which runs during the employment relationship, as even in this hypothesis, as in that of fixed-term contracts in contracted public employment, no "fear" can be discerned regarding the loss of a possibility of stabilization, which is normatively precluded, and of contract renewal, which is the subject of a mere factual expectation that is not justiciable.

Implications of the Judgment

This decision by the Court of Cassation has significant ramifications for all workers involved in socially useful activities. Among the main implications are:

• Recognition of the right to remuneration even in the absence of a formal subordinate employment contract.
• Possibility of claiming remuneration differences from the date of commencement of the employment relationship.
• Clarification that the formal qualification of a contract does not preclude the recognition of substantive rights for the worker.

Conclusions

In conclusion, order No. 11622 of 2024 represents a significant step towards protecting the rights of workers involved in public interest activities. It not only clarifies the regulatory framework for socially useful work but also offers important insights into the evolution of the concept of subordination within labor law. The Court, with its decision, encourages consideration of the concrete modalities of carrying out work activities, promoting a more inclusive and just approach to workers' remuneration rights.