Il saggio è in corso di pubblicazione sul n.1/2013 del Giornale di Diritto del Lavoro e di Relazioni Industriali.

This paper presents a general analysis of the recent  Italian  legislation on employment relations and the labor market (Act. 92/2012). It firstly examines the antecedents and formation of the Act both during the consultations of the social parties by the government, and during the debates in Parlament. The approval the Act by a vast majority of votes has not prevented quite a few divergent opinions and persistent criticisms. According to the Author, Act 92 draws a general inspiration from the European pattern of flexicurity, even though taking into account the specific feature  of the Italian Labor Legislation.
The European directives on employees participation in the enterprise are also indicated as general principles of the Act. The various sections of Act 92 are analysed comparing their actual content with the objectives indicated by the government and with the European benchmarks. The Act improves the protection of employees in case of unemployment but the relevant measures are still weakened by the scarse effectiveness of employment services and labor policies. A most relevant innovation is the promotion of apprenticeship as the main measure to fasten youth employment. The paper examines the different and uneven regulations approved for the various types of labour contracts; fixed term contracts have been to some extent liberalized; on the contrary other types of “atypical semiautonomous contracts” have been subject to restrictions and made more costly, in order to limit abusive and unlawful practices. A most important reform has been approved with regard to Art. 18 of Act  300/1970 which provided for reinstatement in all case of unjust  dismissal. Art. 18 was criticized as an excessively rigid protection of permanent employees. According to the Author the new regulation is in line with other European systems, because it provide the judge the power with of differentiate sanctions depending on the reasons of the dismissal: indemnity becomes the common remedy and reinstatement is reserved for the most serious cases.
In conclusion, the paper underlines the importance of the actual implementation  of the Act which depends on the judicial interpretations and on the (possibly more) future practice of collective agreements between the social parties which the Act empowers to modify the Act in various aspects.