Trade union conciliation is a useful and effective tool to resolve any labour disputes that may arise between employer and employee, thus avoiding recourse to the courts.
It allows, in fact, an agreement with ‘liberating’ value to be reached, including through an economic settlement, thanks to the intervention of a trade union representative who assists the worker.
The most frequent issues may concern pay differences, the assignment of superior duties or disciplinary measures contested by the employee.
In these cases, conciliation can be a quick and less costly solution than court proceedings.
However, in order for such an agreement to be valid and non-appealable, the law requires enhanced forms of protection in favour of the employee, particularly in the presence of rights deriving from mandatory statutory provisions or collective agreements.
In this context, the effectiveness of trade union assistance is of central importance.
The role of the trade union
The mere presence of a trade unionist is not in itself a sufficient condition.
The assistance, in fact, must be ‘effective’, i.e. capable of ensuring that the employee fully understands what the terms of the agreement are.
This means that waivers and settlements concerning the employee’s rights provided for by mandatory provisions of the law or collective agreements, contained in minutes of conciliation concluded within the trade union, cannot be challenged if the assistance provided by the trade union representatives was effective.
Another fundamental aspect concerns the place where the conciliation takes place.
In fact, the signing of the agreement at the seat of a trade union does not constitute a formal requirement but a functional one insofar as it aims to ensure that the employee’s will is expressed in a genuine manner.
Ascertaining the effectiveness of trade union assistance is therefore indispensable for the conciliation to be unobjectionable.
It follows that the place where the agreement was made and signed cannot be considered a neutral requirement (such as whether or not one is a member of the trade union of affiliation).
So-called ‘protected venues’ (such as trade union offices, Territorial Labour Offices, the court) are intended to ensure a neutral and impartial environment, suitable for protecting the employee’s freedom of decision.
The case dealt with by the Court of Cassation in Order No. 9286/2025
In a very recent order, the Court of Cassation reaffirmed a fundamental principle: union conciliation concluded on company premises is not valid even if a union representative is present.
In the case examined, the employee had signed a conciliation statement on company premises, in the presence of a trade unionist of a union to which he was not affiliated.
The Court held that the conditions for effective protection provided for in Article 2113 of the Civil Code were lacking, citing the need for the agreement to be made in a neutral, protected forum and with genuine union assistance.
The place of conciliation is not a mere formalism: the company seat would therefore not offer the required guarantees of third party status, and the employer’s presence could come to influence – even indirectly – the employee’s freedom of self-determination.
For companies, it is crucial to keep a few principles in mind when resorting to union conciliation:
- Conduct the conciliation in a protected venue other than company premises,
- Ensure the presence of a trade unionist effectively representing the worker or in any case recognised by him/her,
- Ensure that the worker is fully aware of the agreement, documenting compliance with the formalities required by law.
A defect in form or procedure, such as the one highlighted by the Supreme Court, could invalidate the agreement, exposing the company to the risk of hypothetical litigation.
The Legal Division of Studio Carone remains at your disposal for clarification and possible legal assistance.