The summer of 2026 was characterized by a limited number of legislative interventions, but by a significant jurisprudential production.
For this reason, the October newsletter offers a concise and operational reading of four recent rulings on employment relationships. The analysis concerns the absorption of the superminimum, the use of geolocation systems in agile work, the disciplinary relevance of the violation of company procedures and the effects of smart working methods authorized even informally.
The decisions examined highlight a common principle: the correct management of the employment relationship requires consistent behavior, clear rules and adequate documentation of company choices.
For each topic, the main risk profiles and the operational measures useful for preventing them are then recalled.
Superminimum: business practice is worth as much as a contract
Supreme Court., Labour Section, 21 July 2026, no. 23704
After several years of non-absorption, despite several economic renewals of the CCNL, the Court of Appeal of Naples had declared the superminimum non-absorbable and condemned the employer to return the sums withheld.
In fact, according to recent case law, corporate usage is formed – even in the absence of a common negotiating will of the parties – through the constant and generalized reiteration of favorable employer behavior , suitable for granting employees an economic or regulatory treatment that is better than that provided for by individual or collective sources.
The employer may withdraw from this use only by means of a clear and unambiguous expression of will, aimed at interrupting the more favourable treatment granted to workers.
Having not found an expression of will of this type, the Supreme Court rejected the company’s appeal, confirmed the non-absorbability of the individual superminimum and reiterated that the constant and generalized reiteration of favorable behavior constitutes a corporate use, which affects individual relationships.
Operational indication: on the occasion of each renewal of the CCNL, it is appropriate to take an express decision on the absorption and provide adequate documentary evidence. If a non-absorption practice has already been established, its modification cannot take place by simply initiating the absorption, but requires the use of the appropriate legal instruments.
Geolocation in smart working: the Court denies the Guarantor
Court of Cosenza, 1 July 2026
The Privacy Guarantor (provision no. 135 of 13 March 2025) had sanctioned a public administration for the attendance tracking app used with an employee in agile work, authorized to operate from three pre-established locations.
The Court annulled the sanction: a system that detects the position only at the time of clocking in is not continuous surveillance, but an attendance detection tool attributable to art. 4, paragraph 2, St. Lav.
Random checks, transparency, prior consent to location, no additional data collection and automatic deactivation outside service hours were decisive.
Operational indication: the concrete configuration of the system is of decisive importance, rather than the technology used itself. A survey limited to the time of clocking in and not of a continuous nature, accompanied by the information provided for by art. 4, paragraph 3, St. Lav. and an updated DPIA, makes it possible to delimit the boundary between work tool and remote control. It remains, however, necessary to consider that this is a ruling on the merits, rendered in the context of the public sector and in contrast with the orientation expressed by the Guarantor.
Just cause for violation of procedures: well-constructed presumptive evidence is enough
Supreme Court, Labour Section, ord. 11 September 2026, no. 25231
A large-scale retail store manager had been fired after an internal audit had detected numerous expired products, not registered or disposed of according to the operating manual, for an extended period.
Therefore, the Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of the dismissal, deeming the disputed conduct suitable to justify termination for just cause.
According to the judges, the repeated violation of company procedures, assessed in the light of the role of responsibility held by the worker and the duration of the conduct, had irreparably compromised the fiduciary bond.
Awareness of the conduct can also be demonstrated through simple presumptions, provided that they are based on serious, precise and concordant elements.
In the case examined, the Court held that the set of circumstances ascertained allowed the irregularities to be traced back to the sphere of knowledge and responsibility of the worker.
Operational indication: the preparation of clear operating manuals, the traceability of the training provided and the timely documentation of audits are essential elements for the sustainability of the dismissal. The solidity of the employer’s defence therefore depends on the completeness and consistency of the evidentiary framework collected.
Smart working tolerated: the employer cannot then contest absences
Supreme Court., Labour Section, ord. 2 July 2026, no. 22622
The company had fired an employee who worked remotely for unjustified absence, after allowing him to work remotely for months, also confirmed via email and never contested.
The Supreme Court confirmed the illegitimacy of the withdrawal, stating that the employer who has authorized or otherwise accepted a certain method of carrying out the service cannot subsequently challenge it by invoking the lack of a written agreement.
The case concerns the emergency period, but the principle is of general application. A working method accepted for conclusive facts cannot be transformed, a posteriori, into a disciplinary charge.
Operational indication: before proceeding with the complaint, it is necessary to verify the working methods concretely authorized, even informally, by the direct manager. Any resumption of in-person work requires clear prior communication, accompanied by the assignment of an appropriate deadline; only then can the initiation of disciplinary proceedings be assessed.
RIMANI AGGIORNATO SULLE ULTIME NOTIZIE LAW. CLICCA QUI PER SAPERNE DI PIÙ!