Italy's Labor Committee is weighing controversial amendments to the "Primo Maggio" employment decree that could fundamentally alter how underpaid workers recover back wages, creating a scenario where judicial victory no longer guarantees compensation for years of below-minimum pay. The proposals, filed by three Lega representatives and one Azione lawmaker, would limit court-ordered wage increases to take effect only from the date a claim is filed, effectively erasing the retroactive component that has traditionally helped workers recoup lost income.
Why This Matters
• Judicial timeline shift: If passed, wage adjustments would apply only forward, not backward—meaning a worker who wins a constitutional pay case for work done years earlier would receive nothing for those earlier years.
• Employer liability shield: Companies that have systematically underpaid staff could avoid years of back-pay obligations by simply adjusting wages once sued.
• Constitutional collision course: The measure is poised for immediate legal challenge, with labor advocates arguing it violates Article 36 of the Constitution, which guarantees dignified remuneration.
The scale of this issue is significant: approximately 8.5 million workers in Italy are currently covered by expired or disputed contracts, making this amendment's potential impact far-reaching.
The amendments were submitted to the Camera dei Deputati (Chamber of Deputies)—Italy's lower house of Parliament, which votes on draft laws—and the Labor Commission began examining them in May. Parliament has a tight timeline to finalize the conversion of the Primo Maggio Decree into permanent legislation.
The Mechanics of the Proposed Change
Under current Italian labor law, a worker who successfully argues that their pay violates Article 36—which mandates compensation sufficient for a "free and dignified existence"—can typically claim arretrati (back pay; accumulated unpaid wages owed to workers) for the previous five years or more, depending on when the underpayment began. This retroactive remedy has been a powerful tool for those stuck in exploitative contracts, allowing them to recoup tens of thousands of euros in some cases.
The contested amendments would sever that link. Comma2, a workers' rights advocacy group leading the pushback, warns that the new language would restrict judicial wage adjustments "exclusively to the period following submission of the claim." In practical terms: file a lawsuit and any wage increase ordered by a judge would begin accruing only from that date forward, with no compensation for prior years of substandard pay.
This marks a significant departure from established jurisprudence, which has historically treated wage violations as ongoing constitutional breaches requiring full restitution. The proposed rule would transform that constitutional right into what Comma2 describes as "a sort of on-request option," forcing workers to initiate legal action immediately or risk permanently losing claims to back wages.
What This Means for Residents
The amendments create a tactical dilemma for Italy's workforce, particularly those in sectors notorious for CCNL (Contratto Collettivo Nazionale di Lavoro—National Collective Labor Agreement) violations—hospitality, logistics, retail, and gig-economy platforms. Workers would face a stark choice: either sue their employer while still employed (risking retaliation and job loss) or wait until the relationship ends (forfeiting years of potential back-pay recovery).
Comma2 argues this setup is designed to protect employers who have systematically applied collective bargaining agreements that fall below constitutional standards. The organization notes that companies "will be able to adapt to wages not necessarily compliant with Article 36 of the Constitution without fearing recovery of the last five (or more) years of arrears."
For foreign residents and expats working in Italy, the stakes are equally high. Many non-Italians are employed under CCNL frameworks that appear legitimate on paper but deliver net pay far below what the Constitution requires, especially when adjusted for regional cost of living. Under the proposed rule, challenging such arrangements would become a calculated financial risk rather than a clear-cut legal remedy.
If You Suspect You're Underpaid: Practical Steps
Given Italy's notoriously slow court system—where wage cases typically take 18 to 36 months for a first-instance ruling, with appeals stretching years longer—timing is critical under the current system and would become even more crucial if these amendments pass.
What to do now:
• Document everything: Keep detailed records of hours worked, salary received, and any communications about your contract terms. Screenshots of payroll records and written agreements are essential.
• Check your CCNL legitimacy: Verify that your collective labor agreement is among the most representative contracts by consulting the major unions (CGIL, CISL, UIL) or your industry's labor board. Non-representative "ghost CCNLs" signed by marginal parties are common in the South and migrant-heavy sectors.
• Calculate potential exposure: If you believe you've been underpaid relative to Article 36 constitutional standards, compute how much back pay you might claim. This helps you decide whether litigation is worthwhile under either scenario.
• Consult a labor lawyer: Many offer free initial consultations. A professional can assess whether your case is strong and what timeline to expect.
Political and Institutional Tensions
The Lega and Azione amendments arrive amid broader debates over Italy's wage floor strategy. The Primo Maggio Decree itself was designed to reinforce "fair wage" principles by linking employment incentives to adherence to the most representative CCNL contracts and introducing automatic salary adjustments (30% of inflation) for contracts expired beyond one year. The government allocated €2 billion over three years (2026–2028) for tax relief on contractual increases, with the stated aim of protecting purchasing power.
However, how these funds are distributed matters enormously. Labor advocates point out that much of this €2 billion is directed toward corporate tax incentives rather than direct worker compensation, meaning the immediate wage boost for individual workers may be limited.
Yet the retroactivity question has become a political flashpoint:
Undersecretary for Labor Claudio Durigon announced that the government would table its own amendment to restore back-pay entitlements for workers covered by expired contracts, ensuring wage increases take effect from the expiration date of the previous agreement. That proposal, however, addresses only contractual renewal gaps, not the broader constitutional underpayment claims targeted by the Lega-Azione amendments.
CGIL, Italy's largest trade union with over 1.5 million members, has taken the hardest line, with Secretary General Maurizio Landini condemning the decree as channeling significant funds primarily to corporate incentives while delivering "not one euro more" directly to workers. CISL and UIL have been more receptive, praising the linkage of subsidies to representative CCNL compliance as a step toward codifying "wage dignity" under Article 36. Still, all major unions have signaled alarm over any legislative move to strip retroactive remedies.
Constitutional Collision and Next Steps
Comma2 has vowed to "undertake every appropriate judicial action to have declared unconstitutional a rule that—if approved—is destined to harm the acquired rights of workers." The association argues that retroactive compensation is not a discretionary benefit but an indisponibile diritto costituzionale (non-waivable constitutional right)—meaning these rights cannot be taken away by ordinary law because they are enshrined in Italy's 1948 Constitution and are considered fundamental to human dignity.
If the amendments pass and a worker challenges them, the case would likely reach the Corte Costituzionale (Constitutional Court), Italy's highest court for constitutional matters. This court has the power to strike down laws deemed unconstitutional. Based on historical precedent, such a case could take 2 to 4 years to be decided, leaving workers in legal limbo during that period.
Legal scholars note that Article 36 jurisprudence has consistently held that wage adequacy is a substantive guarantee, not merely a procedural one. If the amendments pass, expect immediate challenges before the Corte Costituzionale, which has historically been protective of labor rights enshrined in the Constitution.
The conversion deadline is the end of June. Parliamentary observers expect intense lobbying from both employer federations and labor groups as the Labor Commission completes its review. For now, the amendments remain proposals—but their inclusion in a fast-track legislative process has already mobilized Italy's labor advocacy network.
Broader Context: Wage Enforcement Under Pressure
Italy's wage litigation landscape has been strained for years. The country faces a severe court backlog of over 3.5 million civil cases awaiting resolution—one of the highest in Europe. Workers often wait 18 to 36 months for a first-instance labor ruling, and appeals can stretch years longer. By comparison, Germany's average civil case resolution time is roughly 1.5 years, and France's is under 2 years.
The proposed amendments would compound that backlog by incentivizing defensive litigation: employers would have every reason to drag proceedings out, knowing that even a loss would limit financial exposure to post-filing periods.
Meanwhile, Italy continues to lack a statutory minimum wage, relying instead on CCNL frameworks negotiated by unions and employer associations. The system works well when contracts are updated and enforced, but gaps and "ghost" CCNLs—low-quality agreements signed by non-representative parties—have proliferated, especially in the South and in sectors with high migrant labor concentrations.
The Primo Maggio Decree was intended to close some of those loopholes by tying state subsidies to the most representative contracts and imposing automatic inflation adjustments. But if the back-pay amendments survive, the enforcement mechanism loses much of its teeth: workers could win recognition of underpayment in principle yet walk away with little practical restitution.
Impact on Expats and Investors
For Foreign Professionals and Expats:
If these amendments pass, your employment landscape in Italy would shift significantly. The window to challenge inadequate pay would narrow dramatically—making it critical to audit your compensation structure early and document any discrepancies in real time. Many expats are unaware that Italian constitutional law provides wage protections that may exceed what your home country offers, but only if you act within the legal framework while the right still exists.
For Investors and Business Owners:
The amendments could be seen as liability relief, reducing exposure to multi-year wage claims. However, this comes with reputational and operational trade-offs: Italy's labor inspectorate has been ramping up enforcement, and companies found in violation of constitutional wage standards may still face administrative penalties, even if civil back-pay claims are curtailed. Additionally, Italy's reputation as a fair employer matters increasingly to international talent recruitment.
The Critical Window: What Happens Next
The broader message is one of uncertainty. Italy's labor law is in flux, and the coming weeks will determine whether the country moves toward stronger wage enforcement or a more employer-friendly litigation environment. Either outcome will have lasting consequences for the 8.5 million workers covered by expired or disputed contracts.
If you're affected or potentially affected:
• Monitor updates from CGIL, CISL, or UIL union websites for developments
• Contact Comma2 (comma2.it) for resources and advocacy updates
• Document your employment situation now, before any legislative changes take effect
• Seek legal counsel if you believe your pay violates Article 36 standards
The end of June deadline is your window to understand how this will affect you.
