Gabriele Fava on the front page "Article 18 does not apply to state employees" - the “judges' robes” create citizens of series A and B

Gabriele Fava on the front page "Article 18 does not apply to state employees" - the “judges' robes” create citizens of series A and B

Gabriele Fava on the front page "Article 18 does not apply to state employees" - the “judges' robes” create citizens of series A and B

« Article 18 does not apply to state employees »
The “judges' robes” create citizens of series A and B
GABRIELE FAVA

The Supreme Court revives the distinction between employers and workers, returning to create citizens of series A and B. This is in fact the consequence of a ruling filed yesterday, according to which the protection to be granted to employees in case of dismissal, then considered illegitimate, remains reinstated as ruled by the now famous Article 18 in the version prior to the Fornero reform, which favoured the compensation solution.
The ruling is part of the interior of a debate initiated since the publication of the amended text, based on a wavering case-law that, in fact, at first considered also applicable to civil servants Article 18 reformed. With this ruling, however, "stoats" stressed that public employment ratios do not apply to the changes of the law of 2012 the Workers' Statute that "the protection of the civil servant in cases of unfair dismissal notice at a later date after into force of the law is that of Article 18 '.
There is no doubt that the Supreme Court's position will have considerable repercussions in relation to all cases of dismissal to date operated in respect of so-called "scoundrels of the card" if they were reinstated by the court. In this case, the damage resulting from the decision of the magistrate will be born once again, by taxpayers.
It is clear that the reform of the civil service of the Renzi government has not yet resolved the doubts as to the applicable sanction system, and this is the regulatory gap that the Supreme Court tried to fill with the ruling yesterday, in which one can also see an invitation to the legislator to intervene again with a lighter "regulatory approach to harmonization." Although the government, in the implementation of the Madia delegation, has promised to solve the regulatory circuit with ad hoc rules, to date workers are confronted with totally different protection depending on whether public or private employees, creating an injustice in fact hard to accept. It would be desirable, and urgent, that the civil service into line with the private sector, completing the privatization path, in the sign of the principles of good performance and economy belonging to the administrative machinery and the greater the benefit of taxpayers.