How can the government not worry about fragile workers?
From today, fragile workers are deprived of health protections and the merit of this vulnus is divided between Parliament and Government. The intervention of Francesco Provinciali and Francesco Alberto Comellini
Since 1 July, fragile workers are deprived of health protections and the merit of this vulnus is divided between Parliament and the Government. Yesterday, 30 June, the previous ones, renewed with law 52 of 19/5 / 2022- art. 10 paragraph 1 / bis and 1 / ter which in turn confirmed those sanctioned with Legislative Decree 17/3/2020 n. ° 18 – art. 26, paragraphs 2 and 2 / bis.
These are normative references that we have repeated dozens of times to urge the legislative and executive bodies to address two shortcomings: the failure to backdate the protections starting from 1 April this year (and not from the date following the publication in the Official Journal of the aforementioned law 52 / 2022, i.e. from 24/5 us.) And the need to extend the protections themselves after the deadline of 30 June.
Neither one nor the other of the two shortcomings have been filled, in the deafening silence of the unions of the triple with the exception of CONFSAL, this despite the amendments filed in the Senate to the DL 36/2022 and in the Chamber with the agenda of the Hon. .le Massimiliano De Toma, who made it a matter of legal civilization and the assumption of responsibility but which the Government accepted, through Undersecretary Sasso (Lega) with the shameful "undertakes to evaluate the opportunity to", as if the protection of the health of the most vulnerable was a question on which to evaluate the opportunity to act or not.
The response to the parliamentary battles carried out by the opposition benches with De Toma (FDI) but also by the majority with Dall'Osso (FI) are answered in the laughable note published on 30 June in the afternoon by the Ministry of Public Administration which we report but on which however, we express reservations which we think are more than justified.
With this note, the Government confirms us, but confirms it to the thousands of fragile workers and their families who are in summary Citizens and Voters, that it has taken a crab and – if the response to the heartfelt appeals that have come from many parts, even in the press – this is, it comes out really badly, the image, not of the single Minister but of the entire Government which on this point is close to a lack of interest in Ponziopilatesco.
The issue of fragile workers – in fact – requires a legislative extension, not an act – however authoritative – but of mere discretionary interpretation whose application remains in the limbo of good intentions.
It is strange that the Executive has escaped that an expiring law can only be renewed with another law, or in the meantime with a DL to be converted in parliament. (we are at the ABC of law!)
In two years of pandemic it has always been like this, even with ups and downs, forgetfulness, delays, backdating sanctioned and other failures.
It is also strange that in the face of such a delicate matter – such as the protection of the health of fragile workers, in an incremental situation of the spread of Covid which is about to become explosive, so much so as to induce Prof. Walter Ricciardi to foresee a terrible autumn of infections and deaths among elderly and frail people as they suffer from diseases that overexpose them to the risk of contracting the virus, the Government does not immediately run for cover.
Prof. Ricciardi is Consultant to the Minister of Health Roberto Speranza: that he speaks from the top of his scientific authority and is not listened to by the Ministry to whom he advises is an anomalous, singular and serious fact. Indeed very serious.
The political agenda is full of buffer measures, a growing series of non-returnable bonuses that do not solve emerging poverty, committed to renewing the citizenship income and the contract of navigators, subjects paid without working, or in the gossip about diatribes and primacies of the various leaders or aspirants and self-styled such.
In days and days of parliamentary debate on the issue of fragile workers, we have not heard a word of commitment from the most interested Ministers, including the Minister for Disability, Erika Stefani (Lega) whose deafening silence on the issue was absolute.
Thus at the expiry of the double protection in force until yesterday for fragile workers (agile work and the equation of illness with hospitalization, nosological code V07) no voice of the Government has risen to silence the legitimate anxieties of the interested parties nor to commit to give the guarantee of a repetition of the same protections, in a situation in which Covid and Omicron in their variants start running again, indeed they gallop with peaks close to 30% positivity, we, but perhaps not only us, are unable to so guilty silence. And we ask Parliament to call the Government in the Chamber to report on the incident.
The note of the Public Function is not enough, not only: it cannot integrate an expired legislative provision by recalling previous circulars which, moreover, represent a mere indication which, among other things, does not exceed the provisions of the Ministerial Decree 8/10/2021 which establishes art . 1 paragraph 3, letter b), "the administration must guarantee an adequate rotation of personnel who can work in an agile way, since the execution of the service in presence must be prevalent for each worker"; taking into account that in the public sector, smart working cannot be 5 days out of 5, and that therefore the closure of the ministerial note (the NOTE! is reiterated) with that "also derogating, albeit temporarily, from the criterion of the prevalence of the performance of the service working in presence "appears misleading if it does not lead to outlawing the actions of those who authorize smart working without returning to the office of the worker.
In this way, nothing is solved and the problem is postponed once again.
Yet in the meantime the Ministry of Health with DM of 4/2/2022 had drawn up a list of pathologies recognized as "fragile". What is the purpose of this ministerial table of conditions of fragility if it is not applied? Now he is silent – the Ministry of Health itself and with it those of Labor and Disabilities – on how to protect the same workers in the face of the rising wave of infections whose pathologies and frailty conditions have been recognized at the level of the Ministerial Decree and they are certified by the relevant health bodies.
The answer given with the note from the Public Function then totally eludes – it just does not mention it – the situation of those who, as fragile workers, cannot be placed in smart working, lose, with the expiry of the term as extended to 30 June from art. 10 coma 1-bis of the legislative decree 24/2022, the equation of the period of absence from work with hospitalization. Thus having to draw – to avoid the risk of contagion – from the so-called “Contractual behavior” or in the worst case on holidays.
Don't the Ministers know or remember that a cancer patient must undergo cycles of chemotherapy? That an immunodepressed takes life-saving drugs that weaken him? That they are immeasurably more exposed to the risk of contagion? That there are trades and professions that cannot be converted into agile work?
Furthermore, it seems very unethical for the Government to unload any decision on the management of public offices, thus called to assume great responsibilities with the consequent risk for the individual manager, in the event of an error of assessment regarding the granting or not of the smart employee to his or her fragile worker employee. working, to then be summoned for damages if the fragile worker who has not recognized smart working or this should be denied by the doctor called to exercise health surveillance valid until 31 July, should fall ill or worse.
On the other hand, the demotion or the assignment to another function in order to justify the conversion of the activity from "in presence" to "in smart working", beyond the checks on the legitimacy or otherwise of this change, could have "other" implications on the life of the worker who could then charge them to the manager on duty.
And how could an employer ever, faced with a certificate attesting the frailty and unfitness for employment of a frail employee, take responsibility for deciding? "You go to work agile", "you stay at home but get sick, drawing on the contractual leave" which at a certain point reduces, halves or cancels the salary?
How is it possible that a Minister of the Public Function attributes to the manager / employer competences and responsibilities for medical-health evaluation, discernment and decision?
We find it scandalous that the Government has not taken into consideration the expiry date of a state law that protects fragile people and that nothing has so far proposed, if not a mere note which, however, it is repeated, remains a note, not an act having legal value.
Considering the situation as described, we believe that the only reasonable and guarantee solution (also in terms of self-protection for the PA) is to extend the two protections mentioned at the beginning of this article, until 31 December 2022, in order to regulate in through legislation the foreseeable cases.
If the autumn will be difficult and dangerous for the return and the rise of infections, we cannot pretend not to know that this has been foreseen by science.
Any delay or omission of decision would be a harbinger of problems and disputes, but above all it would expose fragile workers to a risk that must be absolutely avoided.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/sanita/come-puo-il-governo-non-preoccuparsi-dei-lavoratori-fragili/ on Fri, 01 Jul 2022 12:43:29 +0000.