By the Labour Law Department
The issue of job duties – and, in particular, demotion – continues to represent one of the main sources of litigation in labour law, both in the private sector and in public employment. Recent rulings of the Italian Court of Cassation and lower courts confirm a now well-established approach: a detrimental change in duties may give rise to employer liability even where the conduct does not amount to mobbing or straining. At the same time, damage can never be presumed automatically and must be properly proven, including through presumptions.
Demotion and damages: mobbing is not required, but damage must exist
With order no. 32359 of 11 December 2025, the Italian Court of Cassation addressed again the issue of compensation for damage caused by demotion and clarified a principle of major practical importance: an employee may obtain compensation for moral and existential damages even in the absence of mobbing.
In the case examined, a bank employee who had been repeatedly transferred and assigned to lower duties had obtained, in the first and second instance, compensation only for damage to professional standing, while moral and existential damages had been excluded. The Supreme Court criticised that approach and stated that:
-
moral damage must be assessed separately from the patrimonial damage to professional standing;
-
prejudice to the employee’s social and relational life, when established, cannot be absorbed within a single lump-sum assessment;
-
the Milan Tables require a clear distinction between biological damage, moral damage and dynamic-relational damage.
The message is clear: even a “simple” demotion, if it produces a concrete prejudice, may generate articulated compensatory liability, without requiring the employee to prove the persecutory intent typical of mobbing.
In line with recent precedents (including Cass. no. 31367/2025), the Court also reiterated that a breach of Article 2087 of the Italian Civil Code may exist even where the employer’s conduct is not overtly vexatious but is capable of creating a stress-inducing or professionally humiliating working environment.
Damage is not “automatic”: burden of proof and assessment criteria
Alongside this broader protective approach, case law maintains a strict evidentiary standard. With order no. 11586/2025, the Italian Court of Cassation reiterated that demotion does not automatically entail compensable damage.
The judge may rely on presumptions and equitable assessment, but the decision must always be anchored to the concrete circumstances of the case, such as:
-
the duration of the demotion;
-
the quality and level of the employee’s previous professional experience;
-
the loss of skills or professional updating;
-
the visibility of the downgrading within the organisational structure;
-
the effects on career prospects and future employability.
This approach was recently confirmed by the Italian Court of Cassation with order no. 1195 of 20 January 2026, which upheld an equitable compensation quantified at 30% of the monthly remuneration, based on a coherent and properly reasoned presumptive analysis.
Higher duties: continuity and strict evidence required
Also noteworthy is judgment no. 518 of 3 November 2025 of the Tribunal of Matera, which reiterates that the performance of higher duties acquires legal relevance only when it is continuous and stable, rather than occasional or sporadic, and therefore capable of characterising the employee’s belonging to the higher grade.
The employee bringing the claim must provide a detailed qualitative and quantitative description of the tasks actually performed, going beyond the mere formal indication of the role.
In the absence of an explicit employer assignment, the judge must apply the well-known “three-phase test,” which requires a particularly thorough evidentiary assessment and consists of the following steps:
-
establishing the factual circumstances;
-
identifying the contractual job classifications;
-
conducting a final comparison between the duties actually performed and the relevant contractual classifications.
Conclusion
These decisions confirm that the management of job duties represents a high-risk area in which even apparently neutral organisational choices may result in significant liability for the employer.
Transfers, reorganisations, temporary assignments, emptying of roles, or the attribution of higher duties now require attention, consistency and proper documentation.
The Labour Law and Industrial Relations Department of Bacciardi Partners assists entrepreneurs, employers and HR managers in managing employee duties, both in the preventive phase and in contentious situations: from temporary changes of duties to the assignment of new responsibilities, including promotions, corporate reorganisations and the prevention of demotion-related disputes.
A correct legal framework today can prevent costs and conflicts tomorrow.
Avv. Enzo Bacciardi – Founder & Head of Litigation
Avv. Michele Sacchi – Of Counsel, Labour Law