The new pronouncement after the two sentences of 2018 and 2020: reforming the discipline "is 
indifferent". De Palma, Fiom: "Put an end to the Far West opened up by that law in the world of work"
The regulation of dismissals contained in the Jobs Act must be reformed as soon as possible. This is the meaning of the pronouncement of the Constitutional Court, in the sentence released today.
In particular, the Consulta writes, it is "cannot be postponed" the reform of the discipline of layoffs. It is a “matter of essential importance for its connection with the rights of the worker and for its repercussions on the overall economic system”. The Court notes that "an indemnity forced within the small gap between a minimum of three and a maximum of six months' salary nullifies the need to adjust the amount to the specific nature of each individual event" and does not represent a “fair and coherent” remedy with the requirements of "adequacy and dissuasiveness". Requirements that were already affirmed in two sentences, one of 2018 and the other of 
2020.
"The sentence of the Constitutional Court, after the two pronouncements of 2018 and 2020, requires heal the wound determined by far west opened by the Jobs Act in the world of work. In a moment of great economic and social instability, we consider it necessary restore legal certainty for workers and the legal civilization of our country”. Michele declares it in a note DePalma, general secretary of the Fiom Cgil.
“The Jobs Act – he adds – canceled rights, and contrary to what was stated by those who strongly supported it, it did not favor employment. It's time to respect the constitutional principles, to reintroduce article 18 of the Workers' Statute and to go back to applying the civilization of work".
Constitutional Court Sentence 183 of 2022
For compensation to workers for unfair dismissal, the Court observes that «The limited difference between the minimum and the maximum determined by law gives a preponderant, if not exclusive, importance to the number of employees».
This criterion, "in a framework dominated by the incessant evolution of technology and the transformation of production processes", is not indicative of the effective economic strength of the employer and does not even offer significant elements for determining the amount of the indemnity according to the peculiarities of each individual story.
However, it is up to the discretionary assessment of the legislator to choose the most appropriate solutions to ensure adequate protection. Hence the urgency of a reform, requested by the Court.
The Tribunal of Rome itself anticipates multiple solutions to remedy the profiles in conflict with the Constitution. Solutions ranging from the redefinition of a distinctive criterion, focused on the number of employed, to the elimination of the special regime and the redefinition of the thresholds.
Source Constitutional Court statement
Judgment 2018
