Mandatory HIV test for the armed forces? We make clarity

In those hours is cause a lot of sensation as reported in ForzeArmate.org by a member of the Italian Army concerning annual control samples .

According to the report, in fact, among the liberatori that it should have been signed to give consent to the taking was also that of the HIV test .

The reader to avoid any repercussions on his work decided to sign, but report the incident by appealing to the provisions of the Workers Statute which prohibits the employer from investigating directly on the state of health of its employees, as well as on the law 135/1990 which prevents the carrying out of investigations to determine HIV seropositivity.

So why was the army asked to sign the release form? HIV ST? For what reason, despite the current regulations are still carried out this type of badysis? And what would have happened if it had been tested positive? Let's try to clarify.

HIV test that says the law?

Given the warning mentioned above, let's try to answer the doubts that Italian soldiers and police members are posing at the moment, starting by badyzing said the law on findings of HIV seropositivity .

In detail, Article 5 of Law 300/70 – concerning health checks – states that:

inspections are prohibited from the employer on the aptitude and the sickness of the employee for illness or accident

The control of absences due to illness can only be carried out by the inspection services of the competent social security institutions, which are obliged to fulfill it when the Employer the work requires

The employer has the right to have the physical condition of the worker examined by public bodies and special institutions.

This is then added to the law 135/90 which, in section 5 prohibits public and private employers from conducting investigations to verify in employees or people considered for the establishment of a working relationship the existence of a state of HIV status.

The following Article 6 states however:

No one may be subjected without his consent, to the badysis to determine HIV infection if it is not for reasons of clinical necessity in his interest. HIV infection badessment badyzes are only allowed under epidemiological programs when the samples to be badyzed have been made anonymous with absolute impossibility to reach the identification. people.

It is then specified that in case of confirmed infection HIV can in no way constitute discrimination neither for access to school nor for the exercise of sports activities; the seropositivity and not may even be the reason for the loss of employment .

This is because at the workplace – as for those who are serving in the armed forces and the police – there is no risk of HIV transmission ; in cases where there are occupational hazards, it is the employer's responsibility to take the necessary measures to protect the physical integrity of employees

Given what has just been said, it seems indifferent whether a soldier is serological or not; why, then, is the HIV test still part of the annual checks that the armed forces must undergo (after the signature of the release)?

Why HIV controls are still mandatory

The problem is that in 1994 the Constitutional Court with award 218 declared illegitimate the party that prohibits HIV-related medical checks; according to the Consulta, in fact, they are necessary for the activities which involve risks for the health of the thirds

In view of the verdict of illegitimacy, the Constitutional Court gave mandate to the legislator to draw up a complete list of these activities; This task is not yet over and therefore – because of the legislative gap – the employer can always act arbitrarily