The Commissione di garanzia dealing with the ownership of the right to strike (some thoughts around the agreement Gruppo Ferrovie dello Stato from 2015).
Journal title GIORNALE DI DIRITTO DEL LAVORO E DI RELAZIONI INDUSTRIALI
Author/s Antonello Zoppoli
Publishing Year 2017 Issue 2017/155
Language Italian Pages 14 P. 591-604 File size 802 KB
DOI 10.3280/GDL2017-155007
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation
click here
Below, you can see the article first page
If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits
FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.
The article examines the agreement of 31 July 2015 of the Gruppo Ferrovie dello Stato, submitted to the suitability assessment of the Commissione di garanzia provided by Law no. 146/1990. Such an agreement, in the face of a continuing high level of conflict in the emblematic railway service, proposes the extension of the heteronomous intervention to the subjects legitimated to exercise the right to strike, by envisaging their selection according to criteria of representativeness. First, the author notes that the agreement, in confirming the peculiarities of the conflict in the service sector, also expresses the need for a redefinition of the fundamental dynamics of the trade union phenomenon coherently with similar more general trends in our country. Secondly, he points out that the Commissione di garanzia, with an improper resolution of formal acknowledgment but essentially of assessing suitability (no. 16/373) - leaving the nature and effects of the agreement unchanged - places the legal ownership of the right to strike (undoubtedly the core of the innovative agreement) at a collective level and at the same time gives a signal, if not makes an invitation, that a statutory intervention is needed in this matter. Expecting this intervention, however, the author finally observes that the obsolete issue of the so-called spontaneous strike can still find a de iure condito solution.
Keywords: Service sector conflict; Trade union relations; Strike entitlement; Representativeness; Commissione di garanzia; Essential suitability; Collective legal ownership of the right to strike; Statutory intervention; Spontaneous strike.
- Contro la titolarità maggioritaria del diritto di sciopero (una critica a proposito dei servizi pubblici essenziali) Vincenzo Bavaro, in GIORNALE DI DIRITTO DEL LAVORO E DI RELAZIONI INDUSTRIALI 159/2018 pp.621
DOI: 10.3280/GDL2018-159004 - La rappresentatività rivisitata: il caso dello sciopero Luisa Corazza, in GIORNALE DI DIRITTO DEL LAVORO E DI RELAZIONI INDUSTRIALI 159/2018 pp.645
DOI: 10.3280/GDL2018-159005 - Il Sistema Paese a Supporto DelllInternazionalizzazione (Italy's System for Supporting Internationalization) Filippo Vergara Caffarelli, Giovanni Veronese, in SSRN Electronic Journal /2013
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2369306
Antonello Zoppoli, La Commissione di garanzia alle prese con la titolarità del diritto di sciopero (riflessioni sull’accordo Gruppo Ferrovie dello Stato del 2015) in "GIORNALE DI DIRITTO DEL LAVORO E DI RELAZIONI INDUSTRIALI " 155/2017, pp 591-604, DOI: 10.3280/GDL2017-155007