A very significant company (in terms of notoriety and outlook) has recently imposed to its employees to substitute the collective agreement, as a source of discipline of employment relationships, a unilateral regulation determined by the company itself. Though noting, as an outcome of a comparative analysis, that the treatment provided by the unilateral regulation is not, in essence, inferior, the Author wonders about its compatibility and, deriving from the theoretical history of collective labour law, argues that the unilateral regulation must be deemed in contrast with constitutional principles; although in our legal system it might be faced only in terms of anti-union action. Probably the regression to such a kind of regulation – typical of the dawn of industrialism – is just a backlash, isolated and almost belated, of neoliberism which has raged without restraint in the last decades of the past century.