Gkn Florence, stop layoffs: news, court ruling

The Gkn of Florence, which for the court of Florence must revoke the dismissals, had to inform the unions about the situation of the company. It is one of the passages of the sentence announced today. “The obligation to inform the union about the existence of conditions that induce the company to assess the need to make redundancies is literally assumed” by the company agreement signed on 9 July 2020 in which Gkn itself, after having excluded ‘ at present ‘,’ the use of coercive dismissals’ had expressly committed to ‘confrontation with the RSU in the event of a change in the current context and market conditions’. “Ultimately, the Gkn was required to inform the union not only of the data relating to the company’s performance, but also of the fact that the picture outlined by the aforementioned data was leading the top management to question the future of the company itself”, yes law in the sentence that accepted the appeal of Fiom CGIL and sentenced the company to “revoke the letter of opening the collective redundancy procedure”. “No information – it continues to be read – appears to have been provided to the trade union about the alarming nature of the data relating to the company in relation to the directives received from the management of the group and the possible repercussions of this situation ‘on employment dynamics’. (as did the defense of Gkn) that the company had no information obligation since there was no explicit request from the union. Indeed, this assumption contrasts both with the content of the undertaking taken on 9 July 2020 and with the actual development of the facts, from which it is inferred that the union’s request has been there and has been ignored. It appears that on 8 June 2021 Gkn had represented possible redundancies to the unions for 2022, quantified in a figure ranging between 15 and 29 units. in the face of this communication, with a note dated 29 June 2021, the union had responded by proposing suitable organizational solutions to avoid redundancies “.” I question the entrepreneur’s discretion with respect to the decision to cease the business activity, nevertheless the entrepreneurial choice must be implemented in a manner that respects the principles of good faith and contractual correctness, as well as the role and prerogatives of the trade union. In this case, the employer party, in deciding the immediate cessation of production, at the same time decided to refuse the work performance of the 422 employees (whose employment relationship continues by law until the closure of the collective dismissal procedure), without mentioning a specific reason that imposed or in any case made the aforementioned refusal appropriate, which is certainly contrary to good faith and makes plausible the will to limit the activity of the union “.