It is customary, in an effort to encourage abstention, to invite citizens to "go to the seaside". On 8 and 9 June, Italians head back to the polls for a popular vote that brings two central issues of everyday life to the fore: labour and citizenship — and it is worth staying in the city. Those who do want to go to the seaside can still do so, because voting will also take place on Monday morning, until 3 pm. There are five referendum questions on which Italians can have their say in this round, which in some municipalities also coincides with the second round of local elections: four concern rights and protections in the world of work, one concerns the rules for obtaining Italian citizenship if you were born outside the European Union. In every case these are abrogative referendums, meaning they propose to repeal parts of laws currently in force. The mechanism is simple: voting YES means wanting to change the existing rule, while voting NO means keeping it as it is. But for the results to be valid, at least 50 per cent plus one of eligible voters must turn out: this is the quorum, and it is an obstacle by no means guaranteed, especially in a climate where information about these referendums is still scarce. Let us look at the five questions in detail.

Citizenship
Unlawful dismissals
Compensation in small businesses
Fixed-term contracts
Contracts and workplace accidents

Citizenship for those born outside the EU

The first question, on the yellow ballot, addresses the issue of Italian citizenship for those born in a non-European country. Current law provides that a foreigner resident in Italy may apply after ten years of continuous and lawful residence.

• Those who vote YES are calling for this period to be halved, reducing it to five years. This is a proposal aimed at fostering inclusion, particularly for those who have been living in Italy for years, work, pay taxes, but have not yet gained access to citizenship.
• Those who vote NO, on the other hand, believe that ten years is a reasonable criterion for assessing a person's ties to the country, and want things to remain as they are.

Unlawful dismissals: reinstatement or compensation only?

The second question (green ballot) goes to the heart of the labour reform introduced by the Jobs Act in 2015. One of the key changes brought by that law was the reduction of the right to reinstatement for workers dismissed without just cause: today, in most cases, only financial compensation is awarded. The referendum proposes to restore the obligation of reinstatement for workers who are unjustly dismissed, at least in companies with more than 15 employees.

• By voting YES, Italy would return to a model closer to the Workers' Statute of 1970, under which a judge could order a return to the workplace.
• By voting NO, the current framework would be maintained, in which compensation is the rule and reinstatement remains the exception.

Small businesses: judicial discretion or fixed compensation?

The third question (orange ballot) concerns workers dismissed from companies with fewer than 15 employees, a sector where current law provides that, in the event of unlawful dismissal, a judge may award a maximum of six months' salary as compensation. The referendum proposes to remove this cap, giving judges full discretion to assess the amount of compensation on a case-by-case basis.

• By voting YES, judges are granted greater power to protect workers in small businesses.
• By voting NO, the current maximum limit set by law is confirmed.

Fixed-term contracts: are "stated reasons" coming back?

The fourth question, on the grey ballot, addresses the issue of contractual flexibility, posing a clear question: must companies always justify the use of a fixed-term contract, even when it lasts fewer than 12 months? Currently, the obligation to specify the "causale" — that is, the reason for the fixed-term contract — only applies to longer contracts.

• Those who vote YES want to reintroduce the obligation for short-term contracts as well, in order to counter excessive use of precarious employment.
• Those who vote NO, on the other hand, prefer to maintain the current flexibility, under which companies can hire on a fixed-term basis without justification, provided the contract lasts less than one year.

Tg3 @Tg3web

𝕏

Italia al voto l'otto e nove giugno per cinque referendum abrogativi su cittadinanza e lavoro. Il quarto quesito riguarda la responsabilità in caso di infortuni

♥ 38 24 mag 2025 · Apri su X →

Contracts and workplace accidents: who is responsible?

The fifth and final question (pink ballot) focuses on a delicate and often tragic aspect of the world of work: accidents on building sites and in high-risk jobs. Today, in the event of an accident, liability rests with the contractor (or subcontractor), meaning the party carrying out the work. The referendum proposes to extend liability to the client as well, that is, to whoever commissions the work.

• By voting YES, the call is for those who commission the work to be jointly liable alongside the contractor, in order to strengthen oversight and protections.
• By voting NO, liability remains solely with the executing company, as already provided for under current legislation.

A vote that has gone largely unreported — but is decisive

Despite the significance of the issues at stake, very little has been said about these referendums in recent weeks. Many citizens are not even aware of their existence, and from various political quarters signals have emerged that seem to point more towards abstention than participation. And yet, it is precisely this silence that makes speaking up, staying informed and voting all the more important. Choosing to go to the polls is a fundamental right and a concrete act that shapes the rules governing labour and civil rights in our country.