A survival wage does not guarantee a free and dignified life

leggi la versione italiana pubblicata su "il Fatto Quotidiano"

????A dignified wage is not necessarily the one indicated in the National Collective Bargaining Agreements (CCNL, Italian abbreviation that we will also use in this the article), even if they are negotiated by the most representative associations.

??♀?This is what the ruling of the Italian Court of Cassation, number 27769 dated October 2, 2023, stated when deeming the compensation under the CCNL “Servizi Fiduciari” (Italian collective bargaining concern concierge, security guard not armed, etc) ?unconstitutional, as applied to some employees in the sector. The Italian Court of Cassation emphasized that the judge, to determine a salary in line with Article 36 of the Italian Constitution, can refer to collective bargaining agreements, but can also deviate from them if the judge finds them inadequate.

Does this ruling undermine the national collective bargaining as a wage-setting agent?

??No, in the opinion of the author. Many professionals in the sector, lawyers, and labor law experts, are concerned that the ruling might lead to a significant increase in legal disputes. However, the compensation levels from the Collective Bargaining Agreements, signed by comparatively more representative organizations, which are now below the hypothetical threshold indicated by a potential minimum wage law, can be counted on one hand.

????Among these are also the compensation rates of the former services fiduciary contract, now an agreement proposal for the “Guardie Particolari Giurate” (security guard), renewed on May 31, 2023, which, according to the signatories themselves, has not significantly increased the economic aspect: the hourly wage will barely reach 6 euros by 2026.

??So, what would happen if a security sector worker, in the coming months, turns to the judiciary to verify if their compensation complies with the dictates of Article 36 of the Italian Constitution? What about the labour unions in that sector, with a contract renewal proposal just signed? Would the media impact push employers' associations to be more accommodating on the economic front, or would it be left to the judges to decide?

??Certainly, as mentioned in previous writings, the CCNLs are also supported by regulatory and mandatory aspects that maintain the authority of the negotiating parties and the contract itself. However, the economic aspect is what workers understand best. Due to this, some negotiating agents might be tempted to increase the economic part of the Collective Bargaining Agreements to make them compatible with a potential Constitutionality judgment by the judiciary and try to reduce the costs resulting from the regulatory part (holidays, permits, sickness, allowances, complementary pension, health care, etc.).

????Article 36 of the Italian Constitution, in the first paragraph, states: "The worker is entitled to a wage proportionate to the quantity and quality of his work and in any case sufficient to ensure for himself and his family a free and dignified existence." The ruling in question overturned the previous decision of the Court of Appeal, which had confirmed the position of the petitioner company, one of the most important in the security sector, regarding the constitutionality of the compensation paid to its employees because it was above the poverty threshold set by ISTAT (Italian National Statistic Office), including overtime hours in the calculation.

??????In this regard, the ruling states that Naspi, access to pensions, the amount of the basic income are minimum parameters useful to the recipient to ensure mere survival but not necessarily suitable for a judgment of "sufficiency and proportionality." Furthermore, it is not enough for the salary to be above the side of so-called "absolute poverty" because the wording of Article 36 of the Constitution refers to a "free and dignified" existence: therefore, the salary is indeed important for basic needs such as food, clothing, and housing, but also for cultural, educational, and social activities.

??One could hypothesize, without diminishing the economic aspect, that at least the parameters of "free and dignified existence" could also be ensured through the so-called Corporate Welfare (daycare centers, counseling services, thermal treatments, gyms, time banks, etc.), that is, the possibility of providing employees covered by a collective agreement with goods and services that the worker would otherwise purchase on the market at much higher prices. Of course, to encourage this opportunity, there would be a need to improve the tax treatment and promote its diffusion, perhaps through decentralized negotiations at the local level.

??In short, there is much to be done on the issue of collective bargaining and Article 36 of the Italian Constitution; also on the front of the so-called "working poor" (involuntary part-time, precarious contracts, etc.) that will be the subject of further analysis: indeed, a dignified hourly wage is one of the elements (but not the only one) useful to prevent this problem in the Italian labour market. On these issues, social partners and institutions can contribute to improving the situation if they avoid ideological or excessively politicized approaches."