The Court of Cassation judgment no. 24653 has determined that the abstention from work is considered unlawful when it’s carried out through undefined behavior.

It has stated that if the strike is put in place through discretionary conductions on the part of individual workers, with the implementation of mechanisms of adhesion undefined, involves a serious danger to productivity and company organization.

The Court has stated that it would constitute a illegitimate exercise the call by a union to a general abstention, without any  reference to the ways and terms of abstention.

In the present case, if the workers are invited by the OS to bring a strike in general terms and without any predetermination in order to the mode, is reset the requirement of organization in relation to the strike, that  has to be present in the known strikes.

Thus, the court has recognized as the right to strike may end up clashing with the right of employers to economic freedom ( governed by the Article. 40 of the Constitution), which is not respected when employer does not plan the corporate structure.

The Court also points out how even the rolling strikes or staggered, the details of which are usually communicate and / or known, are unlawful when they go in compromising business productivity.

Definitively, the abstention beyond those the inner and outer limits of the right to strike, if distort the shape and mode collective, could jputs in danger the organization and productivity, and therefore has to be considered as invalid.