The termination of employment relationship due to an employee's unjustified absence.

The conduct of an employee who is absents from work without justification is reprehensible as it has the purpose of forcing the employer to fire him and obtain the benefit of Naspi.

To be absent from work without providing any justification in order to induce the company to notify a dismissal for unjustified absence and obtain the benefit of Naspi represents a conduct to be censured.

Such conduct, in fact, entails an unjustified expense both for the employer, who is required to pay the so-called "dismissal ticket," and for the State, which provides unemployment benefits to a person who is not, actually, in an "involuntary" state of non-employment.

Recently, the Court of Udine, labor section, in a judgment dated May 27, 2022, ruled precisely on the issue.

The Tribunal condemned the conduct of the employee, noting in the employee's behaviour the de facto termination of the relationship, regardless of the completing of telematic resignation procedures.

The judge gave relevance to the circumstances that hinted at the worker's intention to no longer execute the employment contract since his behaviour led to the presumption that the intent pursued was solely to illegitimately obtain the Naspi, which is recognized only in cases of involuntary unemployment.

We also point out that, back in 2020, the same court (Judgment No. 106/2020 of September 30, 2020) had the occasion to rule on the same type of conduct. In such decision, in particular, the Judge had ruled that the worker, who with continuous and unjustified absences had forced the employer to serve dismissal for just cause, is obliged to return the amount paid as an entrance ticket to Naspi.

According to the Court, the dismissal ticket is, in fact, a tax that the company does not have to bear in cases the worker, instead of resigning, deliberately puts the company in the position of terminating the relationship.

The pronouncements of the Court of Udine point out how, even in the force of Art. 26, of Legislative Decree No. 151/2015, termination by conclusive facts of the employment relationship is still invocable by the company that intends to claim that the employment relationship was terminated at the initiative of the worker, who, therefore, will not be entitled to any compensation for the subsequent state of (voluntary) unemployment.