Translation of the post of March 25

The return of Fantozzi

Punctual to the term that was given, the Government filed this week the Italians the reform of the labor market. The text in question, available on the website of the Ministry of Labour (find the link in the "documents" of the blog) consists of 26 pages. After having carefully read, try to make some considerations.

The first is general and is a question: it was really necessary to reform the labor market in this historical moment in Italy? And this government "technical" has had enough time to study, analyze and discuss the issue with all relevant interested parties (parties, unions, business organizations)? In our opinion, a reform of this magnitude and complexity deserved more attention and consideration by the Government, especially after it was reformed so decided the other pillar attached, the pension that has moved forward at least five years of the right retirement of hundreds of thousands of people who were already very close to retirement age and the age of ten years to retire younger. The reform of the labor market is certainly not a taboo, but now more than reform a matter relating to a commodity even more "rare", perhaps seems more urgent to study and invent new solutions that help create new jobs and new employment in Italy , not in Serbia or Poland, not in China or Brazil, but in Campania and Calabria.

We reach the 26 short pages of text approved by the government, divided into three parts. The first, which would reform the entry into the world of work and then focus on young people, in my opinion disappoint. The intention expressed by the government, should contribute to a greater stabilization of youth employment by shifting the balance, finally, to the open-ended contracts. In fact, reading the contents of the document, it seems to me that this is all going to prove and a lot will depend on the checks that will be implemented to verify the correct behavior and application of new rules by the companies. My impression is that, until the work is a rare commodity, the knife by the handle will have the companies, not the young people seeking employment.

And now we come to the second part, the one about "flexibility in output and worker protection" as the text. Here the discipline is more linear and it soon becomes clear that the goal puts the government. In the case of layoffs or economic objective, the text reads: "if it finds the absence of just cause alleged, the judge declares the employment relationship for the payment in favor of the employee, inclusive of compensation for damages, which may be modulated by the court between 3:27 p.m. months' salary, taking into account various criteria. "So no right to reinstatement of employment. In addition, to accelerate the resolution of disputes concerning the dismissal, the Government proposes, in consultation with the Ministry of Justice, to introduce a special ritual dedicated to these disputes, so that the employee will be fired immediately sop cheaper, but not more work and the companies that have fired the employee for objective reasons, can quickly close the file. For other causes for dismissal, and the subjective ones discriminatory / disciplinary, nothing changes. But it is clear to everyone that will look good from a company you cite as a reason for dismissal or discrimination subjective reason. The burden of proof is on the weaker party, ie the worker. I do not think there is more to be added.

The text continues with a third party concerning the reform of the instruments relating to social safety nets, but here you get into a great technical challenge that frankly leads us to suspend judgment, apart from that of a general nature. Support for workers who have lost their jobs, especially older ones, but have not yet become entitled to a pension should guarantee it. But we would also ensure new job opportunities, exploiting the experience accumulated over the years by these workers. In this field it seems to me that the regions and municipalities can play a decisive role by having a detailed knowledge of what it can offer its own territory in terms of developing new businesses.

The paper concludes with statements of principle concerning the right to work for the disabled, the contrast of irregular employment of immigrants, active labor market policies and employment services, but they are all theoretical statements, which must then be implemented in subsequent legislation. Overall, apart from the radical amendment of Article 18 of the Workers' Statute, we do not think I see in the document significant innovations in the field of labor. Think (but I'd say hope) that this reform, as set, will get a boost development and economic recovery seems unreal.What are the consequences we will face if he spends a formulation of Article 18 so conceived? The failure to protect the employee's dismissal objectively, that any company can easily rely on creating an ad hoc business crisis "driven" to demonstrate that the layoffs are needed to prevent the transfer abroad or to close the plant, will bring a worsening of conditions of employees. This is easy to see, if companies are to increase the bargaining power than workers, they will suffer a decrease in perspective in terms of rights, safeguards, safety devices and is also conceivable in terms of wage increases. But this, apparently not considered by the Government, does not benefit the companies that will have a workforce less and less motivated and proactive whereas the winning companies, the market leader as they say, in all countries of the world, have in the "wellness" in the broadest sense of its staff and winning a strategic weapon.For now I'll stop here.

Many other considerations are that you could do and we have already partly addressed in the pages of this blog. The road to reform, thankfully, is still long before it becomes law in the State Parliament and therefore we will have other opportunities to address the issue in the coming weeks.One last curiosity. What would Fantozzi said to Mega Super Mario Monti Head of Government on the reform of the labor market?

Translation of the post of February 18

New scenarios and old lace


The reform of the so called  world of work we have already discussed in several articles. Now I must make some concluding remarks and hope that the government Monti  incorporating the expectations that come from workers and trade unions and understands that a reform of legislation on these issues can not be done in a few weeks.

Point one, article 18: the news from last week. The Association of the artisans of Mestre has conducted a survey on how many companies and how many workers are affected by Article 18 of the Workers' Statute. Score: 3% of Italian companies over 15 employees, but these businesses employ 65.5% of workers. But who would have thought ... over 5 million companies in Italy, only about 150,000 businesses are involved in Article 18, however, of more than 12 million employees, about 7.8 million people are protected by Article 18 Statute of Workers. Consequence: how can you say that with the amendment / repeal of Article 18 would be affected only a minority of workers and that this article does not affects almost nobody? Instead, only a minority of firms is affected by Article 18, while the vast majority of Italian companies is already outside the scope of Article 18. If anything, from my point of view, we would have to extend the scope of Article 18 even for workers who now are excluded, given that the good lawgiver should extend protection to workers, rather than reduce them, as the Work is the activity that underpin the Italian Republic.

Second point: the reason why Italy in recent years has lost attractiveness for companies (both Italian and foreign) who want to invest (in Italy) depends, unfortunately, the lack of attractiveness of our country. To understand the real problems for companies residing in the excessive bureaucracy which must undergo to get permits and authorizations, in order to decide which business strategies in a timely manner, in a world moving at the speed of the Internet can not be subjected to the time of authorization of our Public Administration . Then there is the problem of legal certainty on which any entrepreneur who wants to invest should be able to count to decide where to spend their time and money. In Italy the crisis of the "justice" has become chronic. On this occasion it would be pointless to talk about because it would take us off topic. However it is possible that a civil trial, maybe just a case of a dismissal deemed unlawful arrivals to the judgment of first instance in four / five years. This is absurd. But there is a problem with Article 18, but the bad administration of justice that keeps investors from our country. Third problem: in our country in recent years is not an industrial policy capable of reading the near future and create the conditions so that the medium and large Italian companies pilotassero change and managed to stay active and compete primarily on the domestic market. Italy has lost entire industries in recent decades: the chemistry is gone, the car is now reduced to a flicker, the energy sector is fragile and you could invest much more, now the fashion is in crisis, the resists' food with difficulty, tourism is not exploited, the shipbuilding industry is dying. A country can stand alone on the service sector? Fourth problem, the tax system. There is immediate and easy solution. Here I will only say that high taxes so high, both for companies and workers alike, does not ease the investments of entrepreneurs in Italy.

Point three. Let's be clear: labor reform is necessary given that employment is declining for several years and especially the youth unemployment concerns seriously, that is, those who must bear the burden of future pensions. Therefore, the labor reform will automatically connect to the pension reform on the one hand, and suppose a serious and thorough reflection on the present economic reality in which you find Italy. We can not intervene in the leg stretched over such sensitive issues within a couple of months. The government "technical" Mario Monti was not asked to turn over Italy within a year, but only to put in place, which in part has already been done, those extraordinary measures (and unpopular) that had to be taken to restore Europe's confidence on the reliability and capacity of the Italian rulers in addressing the economic crisis, averting a new case Greece.

Okay then pose the problem of reforming the labor market, but the theme is of such importance that some further reflection frankly think it should be done.

Translation of the post of February 3

Still on Article 18...

The reform of the labor market have already written on the pages of this blog. We return now readily seen in the argument that the government seems willing, within the next three / four weeks to lay out a reform of this market. The argument then is to narrow topical and involves almost all of us. The work is in fact the typical activity of man, animals do not work, ie do not create their own activities with tangible or intangible, but they respond with their own actions to instinct. But we remain in Article 18.

This morning, the first pages, the main Italian financial daily has dedicated a large well-depth space. From reading emerges first and foremost a fact: the matter of dismissal of the employee is treated differently in different European countries. All laws provide some cause for dismissal combined with subjective dismissal for economic reasons related to business life. The second case does not create "problems" because unfortunately, when a company goes really bad, there are reasons to take the company stopped and the problem does not exist and the worker enough.

The real Italian problem, which emerges by reading the articles published by Il Sole 24 Ore, is when an Italian company dismisses an employee and is set in a legal dispute. Here begins the Italian anomalies, which are of two types: uncertain times, and also long before arriving at the resolution of the dispute and uncertainty in monetary cost that will support the company if the dismissal is upheld. Basically almost all the laws of other countries provide for a maximum reimbursement, while in Italy the quantum is decided by the judge. If one adds the fact that different courts follow different case law on the subject under consideration, the picture that emerges is in fact at least nebulous and could deter investment by large companies in Italy. I say might because if you analyze the declared motivations that drive top managers of large corporations to decide which countries to invest in the world, the ease of dismissal is hardly ever mentioned among the reasons decisive. But this topic is dealt with in another post.

At this point I still have a question and a consideration. The question is: why this Government has decided to pose as central to the reform of labor market change / repeal of Article 18? We have seen that the causes of the Italian resident in a long time for justice and the uncertainty of monetary compensation, but these cases are not directly dependent on the existence of Article 18, but the organization of justice in Italy and by legislation in deficient with respect to the regulation of compensation. Why not start from here?

The account is so simple it may seem trivial: only economic growth can increase jobs and create market opportunities and mobility for all workers, both positive mobility sought in words and hyped by this government. Otherwise, that is, contraction of the economy, companies will be forced to close and then to dismiss, with a just or unjust cause, no matter.For the moment I stop: many would still be things to say on the subject. In the next post.

Translation of the post of January 23

Article 18 and the workplace : the challenge of change.You can talk about today in Italy with Article 18 of the Workers' Statute (in the sense of changing it) or we are in the presence of a Moloch untouchable? I would say that in Italy there is still some freedom of speech and writing, if anything, the problem is to place the correct terms. And I from the definition of human labor.The September 14, 1981 in Castel Gandolfo, Pope John Paul II signed the Laborem Exercens, a key document for those who now want to rethink a new way of looking at work. Reread it causes shivers down my spine for the topicality of the issues touched by the Pope, issues that have been prophetically announced thirty years ago.Near the beginning of the document, it is said in paragraph 3 (cited): "... the fact that human work is a key, and probably the essential key, to the whole social question, if we try to really see the point of view the good of man. And if the solution-or rather the gradual solution of the social question that keeps coming up and becomes more complex, must be sought in the direction of "making human life more human", then the key, which is the work human, acquires fundamental and decisive. "Human labor is then analyzed from different points of view and a paragraph on 16 deserves attention here (cited): "The work is - as has been said - an obligation, a duty that man, and in this way varied of this word. Man must work for both because the Creator has commanded it to him, and because of his own humanity, the maintenance and development requires work. Man must work with respect to others, especially towards their families, but also to society, to which he belongs to the nation, which is a son or daughter, the whole human family, to which it belongs, being heir to the work of generations and with co-creator of the future of those who come after him in the succession of history. All this constitutes the moral obligation of work, understood in its broadest sense. "This in our view the reference scenario, the value scale to refer to begin to talk about reforming the world of work. Moreover, the importance of the work is such that the founding fathers made the art. 1 of the Italian Constitution, or rather the Italian Republic is founded on the job. It follows that first of all, before all else, the Government of the Republic has the duty of care to support the Republic, to re-establish it and fortify every day more and more and then first and foremost to create jobs and not to think about new forms of job loss, layoffs or other.
We come finally to May 20, 1970 Law no. 300 (SO-CALLED Workers' Statute).Remember, those who pretend not to remember, that the law was enacted after twenty years of fiery debates, both MPs in the factories (and the then popular in Italy) and in civil society. No political party in Parliament opposed the Statute, the PCI and PSIUP abstained, voted for the other. By this I mean that the current government headed by a prime minister "maturity" close not think it has a popular mandate to deal with a subject as important and delicate which is to reorganize the world of work in Italy. And above all do not have the necessary time available to make things right. The rest of the priorities of the Government and other mountains were, if anything, the residual forces this government would do better to spend it trying to engage in those actions that reduce the stock of public debt that has reached almost no return, every year, generating a mountain of interests that will be paid to new financial maneuvers using unfortunately. With regard to economic recovery and thus the growth of GDP, I do not think that they depend abolition or modification of an article of the law. Just visit the website and look at the growing line of ISTAT Italy's GDP from 1970 to 2000 to draw the appropriate conclusions.