Resignation by Transfer and Entitlement to NASPI [Court of Turin Sent. no. 429/2023]

In an ever-changing legal landscape, Court of Turin ruling No. 429/2023 introduced a new approach, overturning existing conventions on worker relocation and NASPI benefits.

Is Naspi also payable to those who resign due to relocation?

The dispute arose from a specific event: the resignation for just cause of a female worker. It all began with the transfer of her place of employment from Turin to Trieste, a journey of more than 80 km, which triggered a series of fatal consequences.

The worker applied for access to NASPI benefits, but the application was initially rejected by INPS. The social security agency, following the established practice outlined in Circular No. 369/2018, placed the burden of proof on the worker. According to this interpretation, it was up to her to prove that the transfer was not justified by valid technical, organizational and production reasons, as provided for in Article 2103 of the Italian Civil Code.

In other words, it was necessary for the worker to highlight the groundlessness of the transfer in order to claim the validity of her resignation for just cause and, consequently, obtain NASPI benefits. This position of INPS, rooted in years of practice, made the case not only an individual problem but a relevant issue for workers’ law in general.

The " unintentional loss" of employment due to relocation

The Court of Turin, taking a novel position, upheld the worker’s appeal and, thereby, disregarded the guidelines previously upheld by INPS. This judgment was made taking into account also the Italian Legislative Decree No. 22/2015, significantly contrasting the pre-existing practice.

Italian legislation sets ” unintentional loss of employment” as a prerequisite for accessing the NASPI benefit. Traditionally, INPS has interpreted this requirement as being met only if the employment relationship was terminated consensually, due to a relocation involving a journey of more than 50 kilometers or a commute time by public transport of more than 80 minutes.

Tuttavia, il Tribunale di Torino ha introdotto un nuovo punto di vista. Ha osservato che se un dipendente si dimette per giusta causa a seguito di un trasferimento non sostenuto da “ragioni tecniche, organizzative e produttive”, come sancito dall’articolo 2103 del codice civile, ciò comporta un mutamento significativo delle condizioni lavorative. Di conseguenza, anche in questo scenario, l’accesso alla NASPI dovrebbe essere garantito.

Questo giudizio si basa sulla constatazione che, garantendo la NASPI in caso di risoluzione consensuale, l’INPS riconosce implicitamente che un trasferimento a notevole distanza rappresenta una variazione sostanziale delle condizioni lavorative.

In sintesi, il Tribunale di Torino ha ritenuto che la decisione del lavoratore di dimettersi a causa del trasferimento della sede lavorativa deve essere interpretata come una “perdita involontaria” dell’occupazione. Di conseguenza, non è più necessario dimostrare l’infondatezza del trasferimento per accedere all’indennità NASPI. Questa sentenza apre una nuova via interpretativa, che potrebbe avere ripercussioni notevoli sull’equilibrio tra i diritti dei lavoratori e le esigenze organizzative datoriali.

Conclusions

The ruling of the Court of Turin No. 429/2023 is not merely an isolated judgment on a specific case; it could mark a turning point in the Italian legal-labor landscape. The possible repercussions of this decision require careful analysis by all actors involved in the world of work.

For Employees: The ruling offers a new means of protection, recognizing that resignation for just cause due to an unjustified transfer may entitle workers to NASPI benefits. This decision could encourage greater assertiveness on the part of workers in dealing with unjustified transfers.

For Employers: The need for a more solid and documented justification for transfers imposes a new responsibility. The decision to transfer an employee will have to be accompanied by an accurate assessment of technical, organizational and productive reasons in order to avoid possible litigation.

For employment law practices in Italy: This decision could push companies to reconsider their internal policies, promoting more ethical and transparent management of transfers.

In conclusion, ruling No. 429/2023 by the Court of Turin is not just a circumscribed legal decision, but a sign of a possible change in labor culture. Its repercussions could have an impact beyond the specific case, influencing the interaction between employers and employees, and helping to redefine the balance in the national labor landscape.