confirmed the expulsion from un'impiegatache company had to validate his card from another
The case is considered the "violation of the duties of good faith" even if the employers do not give a result Economic
The case is considered the "violation of the duties of good faith" even if the employers do not give a result Economic
ROME - He lost his job the employee is stamped the card from a colleague, thus altering the certification of attendance. This hard line chosen by the Supreme Court justifying the dismissal of an employee in such a case, even if the company does not derive an "economic damage". The expulsion of the employee is motivated by the "violation of the duty of loyalty" by the employee against the company. In this way, the job section of the Supreme Court, with the sentence number 26239, has confirmed the dismissal of Cristina C., an official at the clinic "Villa Iris" in Turin, in delay on the input to work, had become sign the card from a colleague. Immediate disciplinary dismissal from the clinic in May 2003. The measure was validated by the Turin Court and the Court of Appeals for the Piedmontese capital, in July 2005. Unnecessary burden on the defense had attempted to obtain a lesser sentence, noting that "there has been economic damage to the company" since the employee was present at work, albeit with a bit 'late. The Supreme Court, the ruling 26239, he has emphasized that one of the "economic loss" is only one criterion that justifies the dismissal. Another reason is the "breach of duty of loyalty" by the worker. In this sense, the judges of Palazzaccio write, "the decision of the judges of merit seems to be logical and consistent with the injury motivated because of the constraint trust regardless of economic loss to society. "The Supreme Court concludes by stating that a punch instead of a colleague" is a serious behavior "justifying dismissal.
(October 31, 2008)
(October 31, 2008)