The deputy for the Labour and Employment Rights of Italy: "The only relief of the Hill will not be enough to provide the country with a reform of the Fair Labor unions even if he will not do their part "
Straight of Italy, the movement for the rule of law, transparency and justice, chaired by Antonello De Pierro, takes a position in the matter of the Bill at work that recently the head of state Giorgio Napolitano, has decided to postpone the House. In a statement, the Quirinal Palace said that the decision was due "to the extreme heterogeneity of the law and in particular the complexity and problematic nature of certain provisions - particularly with regard to Articles 31 and 20 - governing issues, relating to employment protection, undoubted sensitivity of the social. "
Antonella Saxon, assistant to the Labour and Employment of motion states: "The issues dealt with in Section 31, paragraphs 1 to 9, govern The new arbitration in labor disputes, and Article 20 limits the liability for asbestos infections suffered by personnel who lends his work on the ship of state. Ask the employees - says the Saxon - at the time of appointment, to opt for compulsory arbitration means to subject a citizen, however, at a time of deep economic recession, faced with the choice between having a job without possibility of going to court in case of disputes and to have no job. How easy to imagine the workers who will be just a matter of principle, thus undermining the rationale behind the legislation employment law which aims to bridge the imbalance in bargaining between workers and employers, which are obviously the stronger party to the contract. "
entering into the specifics of the measure, the so-called "Connected work" approved March 3, 2010 by Parliament and that Napolitano has decided not to sign, the exponent of the Rights of Italy points out: "There are ideas that deserve in-depth historically oriented discussion: Rethinking the role of trade unions and collective bargaining, as well as the model of conflict in the clash that sees the only means of social protection of workers. If the only CGIL resists outside the logical government means that at least the other unions have in fact changed the role and significance of trade union activity. What is the purpose of a union that is aligned with the government at the expense of workers? And what value can have several national collective agreements and contracts resulting from this agreement and abnormally spoiled? The only relief of the Hill - the Saxon notes in conclusion - will not be sufficient to provide the country with a reform of the Fair Labor unions if not the first to look back to their role with great honesty. "
