[ad_1]
The rules on futures contracts and supply contracts contained in the so-called Legislative Decree examined yesterday by the Council of Ministers could cause significant damage to our labor market, already undermined by many evils.
Not so much because the purpose of the provision is wrong. just – in fact, conscientiously – to worry about the fight against the excessive precariousness of labor relations; but you can not think of starting with the wrong goals.
The real goals
The fight against precariousness must be achieved by striking the real roots of the phenomenon, that is to say all situations where the workers, even if they have the right, have no social security cover, do not see the collective agreement sign they are forced to accept irregular contracts to work (for example, fake VAT numbers, simulated collaborations, part-time contracts that hide relations in time full, etc.).
These are the conditions under which hundreds of thousands of workers are involved in the many contractual structures created solely to reduce their protection: pirated collective agreements, false international flaws, contracts that have no service but only the so-called rental of bodies, simulated network contracts, and similar offenses
In these situations, precariet hides, and these are the abuses to be corrected, if we want to increase the general level of protections applicable to those who work in situations on the other hand, there is no point in starting the fight against the precarious from the temporary contract and the offer of work, contractual forms that guarantee the full implementation and complete of all the basic protections of subordinate work. 19659002] Of course, it is possible to think of some corrections also for these relations, which are likely to last too long.
The solution to avoid this risk would be simple and painless: it would be enough to modify it, reduce it, the maximum time that can reach these relations, stimulate a more responsible approach to employers and avoid the transition phase. towards the stabilization of work too long.
The errors
This measure is present in the decree, but is accompanied by excessive constraints that render it unnecessarily punitive. In addition, there are rules that seem to be built for the sole purpose of recreating this rich litigation which, until a few years ago, revolved around these contracts.
It is proposed to reintroduce the causal, a historic accomplishment role: to stimulate judicial litigation and generate additional costs for businesses. Thinking of reintroducing it – from elsewhere with formulas that echo the legislation of the sixties and, in some pbadages, are really obscure – it means recreating this induced judicial power that has especially enriched the lawyers. In addition, there is an obvious technical error, where it is necessary for Employment Agencies to meet the 20% fixed-term limit, a rule that would require many of these firms to close because the recruitment of mbad is not sustainable temporary workers.
the other significant innovation contained in the decree, the lifting of compensation for the prejudice due in case of illegal dismissal, for workers under the so-called growing protection, is also very problematic. The increase of the minimum and maximum amount (which goes to 36 months) of compensation due by employers in the event of judicial defeat will have a very negative effect on the attractiveness of the national system, both for the cost extra that could generate, and for the low reliability message that sends an order that changes the rules all the time.
With these measures, then, we will have more causes and less occupation: does the government really want to achieve such a result? There is still time to make up for this mess, bringing in the conversion phase the necessary corrections to erase the useless and harmful antihistoric rules.
© All rights reserved
Source link
