10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768
The contribution examines the main implications, for employment relationships, of French and Italian national versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate, utilized as wide-range measures to foster vaccination. First, the Author provides an overview of related strategies adopted in the two countries from mid-2021, and limiting access to workplaces. Furthermore, through a comparative legal analysis aimed to discuss if, in the labour context, French and Italian certificates can be framed as statutory prerequisites to carry out a job, as workplace safety measures, or as a hybrid tertium genus, he attempts to let emerge similarities and differences between the two national strategies. Finally, the last part of the contribution focuses on Italy. It examines more in detail the possible legacy of such exceptional measures to contrast the pandemic, emphasizing the risk of a heterogenesis of purposes.
application/pdf
1561-8048
15768
2
en
Matteo Avogaro
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Italian Labour Law e-Journal
Legacy
EU Digital Covid Certificate: from a ‘gentle push’ for vaccination to a condition to work? Implications and legacy in the field of employment relationship
Text.Serial.Journal
https://illej.unibo.it/
15
Theme
2023-03-22
2022-11-09
2022-12-19
2023-03-22
1-16
ILLeJ
Matteo Avogaro
2022
10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768
1
ESADE - Ramon Llull University
1561-8048
2
Legacy
en
16
EU Digital Covid Certificate: from a ‘gentle push’ for vaccination to a condition to work? Implications and legacy in the field of employment relationship
https://illej.unibo.it/article/download/15768/15750
15
EU Digital Covid Certificate: from a ‘gentle push’ for vaccination to                     Italian Labour Law e-Journal
a condition to work? Implications and legacy in the field of                                     Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
employment relationship                                                                                ISSN 1561-8048
Matteo Avogaro                                                          https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768
matteo.avogaro@esade.edu




      EU Digital Covid Certificate: from a ‘gentle push’ for
      vaccination to a condition to work? Implications and
         legacy in the field of employment relationship
                                               Matteo Avogaro*

  1. The EU Digital Covid Certificate: a soft European strategy to foster Covid-19 vaccination.
  2. The French and Italian domestic versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate extended to
  workers. 2.1. The France pass sanitaire and pass vaccinal. 2.2. The Italian green pass and green
  pass rafforzato. 3. The certificates dilemma: statutory prerequisites to carry out a job, workplace
  safety measures, or a tertium-genus? 4. Focus: the legacy of the Italian green pass. 5.
  Conclusions.

                                                         Abstract

      The contribution examines the main implications, for employment relationships, of French and
      Italian national versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate, utilized as wide-range measures to
      foster vaccination. First, the Author provides an overview of related strategies adopted in the
      two countries from mid-2021, and limiting access to workplaces. Furthermore, through a
      comparative legal analysis aimed to discuss if, in the labour context, French and Italian certificates
      can be framed as statutory prerequisites to carry out a job, as workplace safety measures, or as a
      hybrid tertium genus, he attempts to let emerge similarities and differences between the two national
      strategies. Finally, the last part of the contribution focuses on Italy. It examines more in detail
      the possible legacy of such exceptional measures to contrast the pandemic, emphasizing the risk
      of a heterogenesis of purposes.


      Keywords: Covid-19; EU Digital Covid Certificate; Green Pass; Pass Sanitarie; Legacy.


  1. The EU Digital Covid Certificate: a soft European strategy to foster Covid-19
  vaccination.

     The Covid-19 pandemic is the worst health crisis in decades. Causing, in less than three
  years, more than 6,5 million of victims worldwide and around 2 million in the EU. 1

  * Postdoctoral researcher at Institute for Labour Studies (IEL), ESADE Law School, Ramon Llull University
  (Barcelona, Spain). This essay has been submitted to a double-blind peer review and it has been developed
  under the project LABORAlgorithm, funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the
  Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (State Agency of Research), project number
  PGC2018-100918-A-100. The essay has been amended on the 22nd of March 2023 as reported at the following
  link: https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/16617.
  1 World Health Organization, WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard, 2022.
    Matteo Avogaro                                                                                Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                         Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                                Section: Theme




    In this context, the development of vaccines was a remarkable step forward. Although
not ensuring a complete protection against contagion, they strongly contributed to contain
the most serious effects of Covid-19, as confirmed by a data confrontation regarding the
situation pre- and post-vaccines in the first four EU countries per population and with similar
good vaccination trends2 (Table 1).

         Table 1. Covid-19 impact on population, autumn 2020/autumn 2021
                         Peak of deaths Peak of ICU
                                                                      Peak of case
                         per millions of patients                per
                                                                      fatality rate
                         people                   millions of people
                         2020        2021         2020      2021      2020         2021
         Germany         7,3         4,6          61,6      58,9      3,2%         1%
         France          9,2         2,4          72,7      45,9      3,8%         0,8%
         Italy           12,2        2,1          63,7      16,8      3,6%         1,6%
         Spain           9,4         1,2          67,7      31,3      3,1%         2,1%
         Source: Author’s analysis on data retrieved by Our World in Data.


   Vaccines, thus, saved thousands of lives and significantly contributed to lighten the impact
of the infection on public health systems. Allowing governments to relax social-distancing
measures, and ensuring stable conditions to work and carry out business.
   This mutated scenario led EU, from 2021, to switch to a proactive rather than reactive
response to the pandemic3, that included deploying an energic vaccination campaign4 and
ensuring safe cross-border travels within Member States, considered a fundamental step
towards economic recovery5. At the crossroads of these instances, there is the EU Digital
Covid Certificate, introduced through Regulation (EU) 2021/9536 and operative from 1st
July 2021.
   The EU Digital Covid Certificate (hereinafter also the ‘Certificate’, or the ‘European
certificate’) is an administrative act, consisting of an interoperable document issued free of
charge by national authorities in paper-based or digital format.7 It is a temporary instrument,
with final term set, for the moment, for 30 June 20238.
   The Certificate is conceived to be utilised in cross-border movements of people within
the EU, and its function is to attest that the holder had, alternatively: (i) received a VALID


2 Mathieu E., Ritchie H., Ortiz-Ospina E. et al., A global database of COVID-19 vaccinations, in Nature Human
Behaviour, 5, 2, 2021, 947-953.
3 Antonini M., Eid M.A., Falkenbach M. et al., An analysis of the COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in France, Israel,

Italy and Spain and their impact on health and economic outcomes, in Health Policy and Technology, 24 December 2021, 2.
4 European Commission, EU Strategy for COVID-19 vaccines, 2020, COM/2020/245 final.
5 European Parliament, Resolution of 25 March 2021 on Establishing an EU Strategy for Sustainable Tourism, 2021,

2020/2038(INI).
6 Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2021 on a framework for

the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable COVID-19 vaccination, test and recovery certificates to facilitate free
movement during the COVID-19 pandemic.
7 Article 3 (2) Regulation (EU) 2021/953.
8 European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation

(EU) 2021/953, 2022, COM(2022) 50 final.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                    2
    Matteo Avogaro                                                       Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                       Section: Theme




Covid-19 vaccine; (ii) undergo a negative NAAT test (including PCR tests) or rapid antigen
test among those recognised by the EU; (iii) recovered from the Covid-19 infection.9
   As per Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2021/953, when Member States deploy anti-
pandemic restrictions to cross-border free movement “such as additional travel-related
testing” for Covid-19 infection “or travel related quarantine or self-isolation”, people holding
an EU Digital Covid Certificate are, in principle, exempted to them.
   Thus, while the main aim of the Certificate is to facilitate cross-border movements within
the EU when Covid-19-realted restrictions are present – a situation quite frequent until early
2022 – it works also as a ‘gentle push’ to get vaccinated: not considering the undesired option
to have to recover from the infection, the Covid-19 vaccine indeed is the more
straightforward way to get the Certificate. Unlike Covid tests, the vaccine is always free of
charge, provides access to a certificate which normally lasts for months, instead of 24-72
hours, and it does not require, in this time frame, further periodical health checks.
   However, in some Member States the utilization of the Certificate – as preconised by
Recital 49 of Regulation (EU) 2021/593 – went beyond this subtle strategy based on making
easier travelling abroad. In the framework of more intense policies to foster vaccination
against Covid-19, the Certificate, indeed, soon became a pre-condition to crowded places as
well as public transports and, above all, workplaces. This contribution will focus on this
proactive strategy and on its implications for labour relationships, in particular regarding
dependent work.
   The analysis will address France and Italy, two of the forerunner countries in adopting
such policies in mid-2021. The contribution will present, first, the main features of the
domestic versions of the Certificate applied to the labour context (Section 2). Afterwards
(Section 3), it will investigate if these domestic implementations of the EU Digital Covid
Certificate made of it a sort of prerequisite to carry out a job, a workplace safety measures,
or a hybrid tertium genus. Finally, the last section (Section 4) will address the possible legacy
of this process, focusing on Italy.


2. The French and Italian domestic versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate
extended to workers.

   During summer 2021, both the French and the Italian government adopted similar
proactive strategies to protect public health and economic recovery. Aimed at minimizing
the circulation of Covid-19, at fostering vaccination and at keeping at the same time
economic activities permanently open.
   These strategies were mostly based on a gradual broadening of scope of national
instruments implementing the EU Digital Covid Certificate. First, to crowded places, and
then to workplaces. As well as on the introduction of compulsory vaccination for specific
groups of people.



9   Article 3 (1), 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation (EU) 2021/953.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                          3
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                            Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                      Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                             Section: Theme




  This section will focus on the first aspect, presenting the policies to implement the
domestic versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate on workplaces. The extension of this
contribution, instead, does not allow to discuss as well measures for compulsory vaccination.
To them are dedicated, when needed, only brief remarks.


2.1. The France pass sanitaire and pass vaccinal.

    France implemented two domestic versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate. The pass
sanitaire, and the pass vaccinal.
    The pass sanitaire was introduced before Regulation (EU) 2021/593 entered into force, by
Article 1 of the Loi nº 2021-689 of 31 May and Article 1 of the Décret n° 2021-724 of 7
June. Afterwards it has been integrated in the European framework. The pass sanitaire, like
the EU Covid Digital Certificate, consists of a document issued on digital or paper-format,
allowing its holders to demonstrate to have been vaccinated, or to have been tested negative
for Covid in the last 24 hours or, finally, to have recovered from the infection by not more
than 6 months.10
    After its introduction, the field of application of the pass sanitaire has been rapidly
enlarged,11 through Décret nº 2021-955 of 19 July 2021, Loi nº 2021-1040 of 5 August and
Décret nº 2021-1059 of 7 August, in a material and a personal direction.
    On the material side, the pass sanitaire became a prerequisite to access many places,
establishments, services and events. The criterion adopted by the French legislator was to
make the pass sanitaire mandatory only to access places open to public, that included (i) leisure
and cultural places; (ii) commercial catering; (iii) health, social and medico-social services;
and (iv) malls, fairs and conferences. Furthermore, the pass sanitaire became a condition also
for interregional displacements, such as for internal flights and high speed or long-distance
trains.12
    Nonetheless, the most relevant novelty of this round of measures extending the pass
sanitaire was about its personal scope. Until August 2021, the pass sanitaire had been a
mandatory requirement jut for customers or users. From 1 September, its field of application
was, instead, enlarged to the other people ‘intervening’ in these places. That is, to workers –
including employees working therein, as well as other groups like employers, public servants
and self-employed – but only under the condition that they were carrying out their
performance in direct contact with public.13 For instance, were excluded cooks and assistants




10 Gouvernement.fr, «Pass sanitaire»: toutes les réponses à vos questions, 12 July 2021 :
https://www.gouvernement.fr/actualite/pass-sanitaire-toutes-les-reponses-a-vos-questions.
11 For the initial scope, Favennec-Héry F., La gestion de la sortie de crise sanitaire: la continuité, in Semaine Sociale Lamy,

1959, 2021.
12 For a detailed list, Gouvernement.fr, Où le «pass sanitaire» est-il obligatoire?, 21 July 2021 :

https://www.gouvernement.fr/actualite/ou-le-pass-sanitaire-est-il-obligatoire.
13 Article 47-1 (IV) of Décret nº 2021-699 of 1 June, as modified by Décret nº 2021-1059 of 7 August.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                 4
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                             Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                       Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                              Section: Theme




preparing meals in the kitchen of a restaurant, since it was unlikely that they could have
contacts with customers.14
   The pass vaccinal, finally, substituted, for workers, the pass sanitaire from 24 January 2022,15
in reason of the worsening of pandemic indicators.16 While identical, in its structure, to the
pass sanitaire, it was available just to people entered in the vaccination process,17 or that
recovered from Covid-19 by less than 6 months. Conversely, a negative covid-test was not
accepted anymore to issue this kind of pass. The material and personal scope, instead,
remained the same of the pass sanitaire.
   From March 2022, the improvement of the pandemic situation in Europe allowed the
legislator to relax measures. Décret nº 2022-352 of 12 March suspended the pass vaccinal from
14 March,18 while the pass sanitaire, that continued to be required to access places like health
facilities, has been repealed from 1 August 2022, as per Article 10 of Décret n° 2022-1097
of 30 July. Therefore, all workers, save those subjects to mandatory vaccination, are now free
to access workplaces without presenting any certification.
   The sanctions for employees not holding a pass sanitaire or a pass vaccinal were identical,
and consisted of atypical measures.19
   According to Article 1 (II) C1 and C2 of Loi nº 2021-689, employers were obliged to
suspend the employment relationship of employees without a pass sanitaire or a pass vaccinal.20
During the suspension, employees had, in general, no right to get any remuneration from the
employer.21 Conversely, the law did not include causes of dismissal for employees without a
pass, after the Conseil Constitutionnel removed those for fixed-term employees, which were still
present after the parliamentary discussion of the bill.22
   After having ordered the suspension, the employer was supposed to set an interview with
the employee, within 3 days, to examine viable solutions to overcome the impasse, including,
beyond getting the pass, adopting arrangements to make employee’s tasks compatible with
her/his current condition, as well as analysing the option to re-assign the employee to other
tasks suitable for her/his status.23


14 Fabre A., Les obligations de vaccination et de présentation d’un passe sanitaire, in Revue de Droit du Travail, 9, 2021, 512-
518.
15 Loi nº 2022-46 of 22 January; Décret nº 2022-51 of 22 January.
16 Vie publique, Loi du 22 janvier 2022 renforçant les outils de gestion de la crise sanitaire et modifiant le Code de la santé

publique, 23 January 2022.
17 Gouvernement.fr, Le «pass vaccinal», mode d’emploi, 23 January 2022:

https://www.gouvernement.fr/actualite/le-pass-vaccinal-mode-d-emploi.
18 Service-Public.fr, Fin du pass vaccinal et du port du masque en intérieur à partir du 14 mars 2022, 14 mach 2022.
19 Jubert-Tomasso, La mise en œuvre de la politique vaccinale dans l’entreprise au prix d’une altération de droit de la santé et

de la sécurité au travail, in Revue de Droit du Travail, 9, 2021, 488-490.
20 The suspension was supposed to cease when the employee finally presented the required pass; see Milet L.,

Loi «Passe vaccinal»: quelles conséquences sur la relation de travail?, in Nouvelle Vie Ouvrière, 7 February 2022.
21 For further details, Kahn dit Cohen T., La suspension du contrat de travail: pari (politique) et difficultés (juridiques), in

Droit Social, 2, 2022, 113-118.
22 Décision n° 2021-824 DC du 5 août 2021 in Légifrance; see also Fabre A., (14), pp. 515-517. For an opinion

considering possible to dismiss suspended employees in case of long-term and Covid-related absence disrupting
the functioning of the enterprise, Dalmasso R., Traîtes ou refuzniks? Le délicat renvoi des salariés réfractaires au vaccin,
in Droit Social, 2, 2022, 119-123.
23 Kahn dit Cohen T., nt. (21), 116-117.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                  5
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                                     Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                               Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                                      Section: Theme




   The inclusion in the interview agenda of these different options than getting a pass
emphasizes, indeed, that the pass sanitaire and vaccinal were aimed to push towards vaccination,
in principle, only employees exposed to a specific risk of contagion because their tasks.
Furthermore, the suspension could be partial. That is, the employee with part of her/his
tasks not falling in the area for which the pass was required, was allowed to keep doing them,
receiving the proportional pay. At the same time, the law seemed not to exclude, for
employees going to be suspended, the option to switch to telework, partially or totally, when
compatible with their tasks.24 This framework suggests that the prevalent rationale of the
French passes was to establish protective measures for employees most exposed to risks of
contagion, rather than merely ‘punish’ those not compliant with pass regulation.


2.2. The Italian green pass and green pass rafforzato.

   Italy, like France, utilised two versions of the EU Digital Covid Certificate in the labour
context: the green pass and the green pass rafforzato.
   The green pass was introduced through Decreto-Legge n. 52/2021 of 22 April and then
integrated in the EU framework. Like the European Certificate and the French pass sanitaire,
the Italian green pass is a document in digital or paper format, including data specifying if the
holder (i) has been vaccinated against Covid-19; (ii) tested negative through an admitted
covid-test; (iii) or recovered from the illness.
   Moreover, also the green pass was gradually introduced, first, as an instrument to limit
access of users and customers to activities and services, and subsequently extended to
workplaces.25
   On the labour side, after some intermediate steps,26 the legislator finally extended, through
Articles 1-3 of Decreto-Legge n. 127/2021 of 21 September, the request to hold a green pass
to most of Italian workers.
   In this view, from 15 October 2021 the green pass was required to all people in order to
access workplaces for job-related reasons: private and public employees, but also those not
employed therein. Like trainers, volunteers or agency workers.27 The scope of the obligation
went even far beyond dependent work, reaching self-employed as well as domestic workers.28
Finally, also the option to utilize remote work to avoid the obligation to hold a green pass was



24 Kahn dit Cohen T., nt. (21), 117. Contra, regarding telework, Meiffret-Delsanto K., Obligation vaccinale contre la
Covid-19: une protection de la population nocive pout l’entreprise?, in Droit Social, 2, 2022, 107.
25 Inter alia, Sonnati S., La progressione delle misure di sicurezza e le complessità teoriche e applicative dell’obbligo di certificazione

verde Covid-19 nei luoghi di lavoro, in Labor. Il lavoro nel diritto, 1, 2022, 25-54.
26 They concerned, from 1 September 2021, employees of the national educational system and universities

(Article 1 of Decreto-Legge n. 111/2021 of 6 August), and, from 11 September, workers of educational services
for children and for workers of the system of vocational and professional training (Article 9-ter.1 of Decreto-
Legge n. 122/2021 of 10 September),
27 Gargiulo U., Considerazioni “pragmatiche” su green pass e obblighi del lavoratore, in Diritto della Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 2,

2021, 47-48.
28 Lazzari C., Obbligo vaccinale, Green pass e rapporto di lavoro, in Diritto della Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 2, 2021, 10.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                             6
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                        Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                  Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                         Section: Theme




excluded for people not already working remotely full-time. The latter would anyway have
had to show a valid pass, not to incur in sanctions, to access employer's premises, even once.29
    The green pass rafforzato – a certificate identical to the green pass, but issued only to people
who had entered in the vaccination process, or recovered from Covid-19, had a scope of
application that, instead, followed a personal criterion. Article 1 of Decreto-Legge n. 1/2022
of 7 January made it mandatory only for workers aged 50 years or more, and previously
already required to hold a green pass while working. In this view, like for the French pass
vaccinal, people required to hold and show a green pass rafforzato were not allowed to access
workplaces just on the basis of a recent negative covid-test.
    Finally, during spring 2022 also in Italy the pandemic situation improved. As a
consequence, Article 8 (6) and Article 6 of Decreto-Legge n. 24/2022 of 24 March removed,
respectively, the obligation to hold a green pass rafforzato for workers aged 50 years or more
(from 25 March), and, as of 1 May 2022, the more general obligation to hold a green pass for
all workers. Since then, also non-vaccinated people, thus, have been allowed to return to
work, without obligation to show specific certificates.30
    While the two Italian passes were into force, Italian law delegate, in principle, employers
to control that employees were holding a valid certificate at the entrance of employers’
premises. To ease employers in the control stage, Article 3 of Decreto-Legge n. 139/2021 of
8 October authorised them to ask employees in advance if they had a valid pass, in case of
specific organizational reasons.31
    In case of breach of the employees’ obligation to hold a green pass or green pass rafforzato,
the Italian legislator introduced a system of ad hoc sanctions.
    More specifically, for employees without a valid pass, the technical solution finally
adopted by the legislator – from September 2021 –consisted of marking them, ex lege, as
unauthorised absents.32 From the first employee’s attempt to access workplace without a
pass, thus, the employer was requested to prevent the employee to work and to stop paying
remuneration. Without any further obligation concerning communication of the measure,
interviews or attempts to re-locate the employee in the employer’s organization.33
Furthermore, from January 2022,34 after 5 days of such unauthorised absence of an employee,
the employer was allowed (but not obliged) to suspend the employee for 10 days, renewable
once, and corresponding to the duration of the temporary agreement executed with the
substitute that was hired. In this way, employers had the possibility to retain substitutes of
suspended employees until the former had finished their fixed term contract of 10-20 days,




29 Pogliotti G., Tucci C., Obbligo green pass anche per chi lavora in smart working, in Il Sole 24 Ore, 15 February 2022.
30 Bottini A., Dal 1° maggio al lavoro senza esibire green pass, in Il Sole 24 Ore, 28 April 2022; Melis V., Da Aprile
graduale addio al green pass, in Quotidiano Lavoro, 28 March 2022.
31 Gargiulo U., nt. (27), 49-50.
32 For the previous solution, consisting of a suspension without compensation, Bottini A., nt. (30). For related

case-law, Miscione M., La giurisprudenza sulla legislazione Covid, in Il Lavoro nella Giurisprudenza, 1, 2022, 101.
33 Articles 9-quinquies (6) and Articles 9-septies (6) of Decreto-Legge n. 127/2021.
34 This was a general extension of a measure initially reserved to small companies (below 15 employees), see

Article 3 (1-c) of Decreto-Legge n. 1/2022.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                            7
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                                  Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                            Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                                   Section: Theme




postponing the right of the suspended employee to come back to work although she/he
obtained, in the meantime, a valid green pass or green pass rafforzato.35
   Finally, for employees caught already on the workplace without a valid pass, it was
established an administrative sanction. For this infraction, they were also not exempted from
disciplinary measures, that the employer could adopt according to collective agreements and
company regulations. This led to consider that, in the most serious cases – like a worker
accessing workplace without a pass and with an active Covid-19 infection –, this worker
could have been dismissed for disciplinary reasons.36


3. The certificates dilemma: statutory prerequisites to carry out a job, workplace
safety measures, or a tertium-genus?

    The analysis conducted in Section 2 provides useful information to try to reply to the
question that inspired this study. That is, investigating, from a labour perspective, what could
be the ‘real nature’ of the French pass sanitaire/pass vaccinal and of the Italian green pass/green
pass rafforzato, which between 2021 and 2022 deeply influenced the condition of a significant
part of workers of the two countries – and especially of employees. In particular, discussing
if the aforementioned passes could be considered (i) a sort of exceptional prerequisite to
carry out a job; (ii) a pandemic-related workplace safety measure; or, even, an (iii) hybrid
tertium genus between these two options.
    An attempt of systematic classification is possible since the relevant areas of the two legal
frameworks are very similar. This, also as a consequence of the coordination realised by the
EU law in the field of occupational health and safety, through Council Directive
89/391/EEC37 and the subsequent ‘daughter’ directives.38
    In this view, a prerequisite to carry out a job can be defined as a burden weighting on
people interested to do a specific job.39 For instance, getting a specific degree or qualification
for professionals, like lawyers and engineers. Or, in the health sector, the prerequisite to have
received specific vaccinations imposed by law to carry out certain jobs. Like, for doctors, the
compulsory vaccination against Covid-19 established in Italy, and that, until 31 October
2022, prevented any not vaccinated doctor to exercise medical practice.40 Or, in France,
mandatory vaccinations established by Articles L. 3111-4 and L. 3112-1 of the Code de la
Santè Publique, including vaccination against hepatitis B, diphtheritic and tuberculosis. That,

35 Mario S., Vella L., Rientro (quasi) immediato per il dipendente che abbia ottenuto il green pass, in Guida al Lavoro, 12,
2022, 17-20.
36 Gargiulo U., nt. (27), 56-57.
37 Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements

in the safety and health of workers at work.
38 For an overview, Angelini L., La sicurezza del lavoro nell’ordinamento europeo, in Working Papers Olympus, 29, 2013,

16-21; see also Véricel M., La loi Santé au travail du 2 août 2021 renforce-t-elle réellement la prévention en santé au travail?,
in Revue de Droit du Travail, 12, 2021, 690-692.
39 Pisani C., Il vaccino per gli operatori sanitari obbligatorio per legge è requisito essenziale per la prestazione, in Lavoro Diritti

Europa, 2, 2021, 11-12.
40 Article 4 (4) of Decreto-Legge n. 44/2021 of 1 April, as modified by Decreto-Legge n. 162/2022 of 31

October.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                         8
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                            Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                      Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                             Section: Theme




for doctors not vaccinated and not holding a medical justification, are considered a right
cause of dismissal.41
   In this view, a prerequisite to carry out a job is normally established by law. It concerns
groups of workers doing specific activities or professions, identified a priori by the legislator.
Moreover, prerequisites to carry out a job are usually introduced to pursue a public interest
not necessarily linked with occupational health and safety. For instance, mandatory
vaccination against Covid-19 set for Italian doctors pursued the protection of public health,
limiting the number of doctors infected and ensuring the functioning and resilience of the
National Health System. While protection of doctors’ health and safety at work was even not
expressly mentioned by Article 4 (1) Decreto-Legge n. 44/2021.
   In this framework, citizens are free not to fulfil a prerequisite to carry out a job, without
any legal consequence in their everyday life. Except if they want to do, among many others,
exactly the job for which the prerequisite is established. In that case, if they do not fulfill the
prerequisite, normally they are prevented to carry out that job.
   Instead, workplace safety measures are solutions that employers in France and in Italy are
requested to adopt to prevent risks for occupational health and safety concerning their
employees, after having conducted a yearly risk-assessment imposed by national laws.42 In
France, with the aim to provide workers exposed to the detected risks with the best level of
protection.43 Or, in Italy, to remove – and if not possible, to minimize – any possible negative
consequence for employees’ health.44 These measures can consist of general organizational
solutions, as those aimed to reduce the number of workers exposed to a specific risk. Or
they can be more specific, like the introduction of personal protective equipment.
   On their turn, employees who do not comply with workplace safety measures set by the
employer are exposed, normally, to disciplinary and/or criminal sanctions.45
   Workplace safety measures, thus, are normally introduced by employers, for workers
exposed to general or specific job-related risks. Their aim is to ensure employees’
occupational health and safety, and they just indirectly contribute to reach other public policy
goals, like protection of public health.46
   In the light of the above, the pass sanitaire/pass vaccinal and the green pass/green pass rafforzato
can be considered hybrid legal institutes. They are, indeed, specific ‘prerequisites to access
workplaces’.47 A sort of tertium genus, located at a half-way between the aforementioned
prerequisites to carry out a job and workplace safety measures.

41 Pontif V., Vaccination réglementaire: refus constitutif d’une cause réelle et sérieuse de licenciement, in Revue de Droit du
Travail, 2012, 637-638.
42 In France, Article L. 4161-1 and R. 4121-1ff. Code du Travail; in Italy, Articles 15 and 28ff. of Decreto

Legislativo n. 81/2008 of 9 April.
43 Article L. 4121-3 (3) Code du Travail; see Badel M., Charbonneau A., Lerouge L., Droit de la santé et de la sécurité

au travail, Gualino, 2018, 71-72.
44 Article 15 (1-c) Decreto Legislativo n. 81/2008; see also Natullo G., Ambiente di lavoro e tutela della salute,

Giappichelli, 2021, 44ff.
45 Del Punta R., Diritto del Lavoro, Giuffré, 2021, 616-617; and Badel M., Charbonneau A., Lerouge L. nt. (43),

66.
46 On the increasing permeation between occupational health and safety and protection of public health, Peruzzi

M., Covid-19 e sicurezza sul lavoro, tra obbligo vaccinale e green pass, in Diritto della Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 2, 2021, 25-31;
and Véricel M., nt. (38), 697.
47 Mattei A., Obbligo vaccinale e rapporto di lavoro, in WP CSDLE “Massimo D’Antona”.IT, 442, 2021, 29.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                 9
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                              Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                        Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                               Section: Theme




    This because the French and Italian passes have some common elements with a
prerequisite to carry out a job. They are all statutory measures, introduced by the legislator
and not, like workplace safety measures, by employers; furthermore, they are mostly aimed
to pursue a general public interest – that is, at the end, encouraging people to get vaccinated.
However, the pass sanitaire/pass vaccinal and the green pass/green pass rafforzato are not properly
prerequisites to carry out a job, since the passes are not an essential element for the work
performance. Instead, they are needed just to access the locations where the corresponding
work performance is usually conducted. For this reason, as already explained in Section 2,
both in France and in Italy it seems that a full-time teleworker/remote worker – at least in
case she/he was already working remotely when passes where introduced – could continue
conducting that activity without getting vaccinated or presenting the results of a covid-test.
    As well, the pass sanitaire/pass vaccinal and the green pass/green pass rafforzato are not properly
workplace safety measures. Because, unlike workplace safety measures, the decision to adopt
or not the French and Italian pass is not delegated to employers, on the basis of a risk
assessment focused on the concrete features of each workplace. Furthermore, at least
regarding the green pass and the pass sanitaire, because they can be obtained also through a
negative covid-test which, unlike vaccination, is not a measure that directly increases the
protection of individuals against Covid-19 contagion. While increasing – always – direct
individuals’ protection is a fundamental feature that a workplace safety measure must have.48
    Although the French and Italian passes are not properly workplace safety measures, this
does not exclude they can have, anyway, also an occupational health and safety dimension.
That is, they contribute to protect the work environment against Covid-19, reducing the
possibility that infected people can access it. Nonetheless, from this point of view the
strategies followed by the French and the Italian legislator partially diverge.
    France imposed the pass sanitaire only to workers most exposed to risk of Covid-19
contagion.49 That is, to workers operating in locations where a high attendance of public was
expected, like leisure locations, commercial catering and health facilities. And only if these
workers were appointed with tasks putting them into direct contact with the public, so with
a large number of people that could have included someone infected. The main rationale of
the pass sanitarie, thus, seems to have been the one of protecting workers most exposed to a
specific risk of Covid-19 infection, indirectly encouraging them to get vaccinated.
    This assumption seems confirmed also by the system of sanctions linked to the pass
sanitaire. Employees without a valid pass sanitaire had, indeed, right to be moved to tasks not
requiring the pass. Or the possibility to start another job, for which the pass was not
requested.50 Prevention to work, through a suspension, was thus conceived as an extrema ratio,
operating only when an alternative safe solution was unavailable.
    The same approach is shared by the French pass vaccinal that, as explained above (Section
2), works exactly like the pass sanitaire. Save that it cannot be issued just on the basis of a
negative covid-test. Thus representing a stronger incentive to vaccination.

48 Lazzari C., nt. (28), 20-21.
49 Gamet L., En quelle mesure l’employeur peut-il prendre en compte le statut vaccinal du salarié?, in Revue de Droit du Travail,
9, 2021, 484-487.
50 Kahn dit Cohen T., nt. (20), 117.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                  10
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                             Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                       Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                              Section: Theme




    Also the Italian green pass rafforzato, that like the French pass vaccinal was not issued to
workers with only a negative covid-test, seems sharing the rationale to protect a cohort of
workers exposed to a specific risk linked to Covid-19. Although, in this case, the target were
workers aged 50 years or more. That is, not those most exposed to a risk of infection in
reason of their tasks, but those most likely to experience grave consequences in case of
Covid-19 infection.
    The fourth instrument analysed – the Italian green pass – conversely, seems characterised
by a different approach. The Italian legislator, in this case, did not follow the proposals aimed
to introduce enhanced measures just to foster vaccination for those workers exposed to a
specific risk of Covid-19 contagion.51 Conversely, it assumed Covid-19 as an omnipresent
hazard.52 And so, as a general, rather than specific, risk for occupational health and safety.
    On this line, the green pass was extended to all the Italian workers not included in the
narrower group of those for which vaccination was compulsory, or for which a green pass
rafforzato was required. The green pass was, hence, imposed to workers – not only private and
public employees, but also self-employed – exposed to diverse odds of contagion. Treating,
for instance, in the same way people working in crowded places and in contact with public,
those working in a room without office-mates, and even self-employed spending most of
working time alone. As well as preventing employees from switching to telework after the
introduction of the green pass, to avoid the obligation to hold it. Furthermore, the scope of
application of the green pass was not differentiated also regarding the risk of most negative
consequences in case of Covid-19 infections.
    In the same way, the system of sanctions for not holding a valid green pass did not include
alternatives from prevention to work, like switching to different tasks or finding another –
safer – job. Therefore, without a valid green pass, in Italy, from 15 October 2021 to 30 April
2022 was impossible to carry out, substantially, any job.53 A so radical solution surely
contributed to increase occupational health and safety. It lets emerge, anyway, also another
underlying strategy.
    The introduction of such prerequisite to access all workplaces, irrespectively of the
effective risk of contagion for job-related reasons, seems to disclose, indeed, also a public
health strategy that is not shared by the green pass rafforzato and by the French passes. Mostly
aimed, rather than to protect workers more at risk for Covid-19, to force the highest possible
number of people to utilise the green pass. And so, at the end, to get vaccinated, as the solution
with less social and monetary costs to obtain a stable certificate (see supra, Section 1). This,
although a formal and generalized obligation to get vaccinated was never introduced.54
    The specificity of the Italian green pass deserves an additional reflection on what could be
its legacy after the end of the Covid-19 crisis.

51 Pisani C., nt. (39), 10-13.
52 De Matteis A., Art. 32 della Costituzione: diritti e doveri in tema di vaccinazione anti-Covid, in Conversazioni sul lavoro a
distanza da agosto 2020 a marzo 2021, 2021.
53 For dependent work Gargiulo U., nt. (27), 51. It could be assumed that the only workers excluded from green

pass where those working remotely full-time when the measure was introduced, and that have not accessed
premises for which the pass was required for all the period in which it was into force.
54 Mostly for political reasons, see Pascucci P., Delogu A., L’ennesima sfida della pandemia Covid-19: esiste un obbligo

vaccinale nei contesti lavorativi?, in Diritto della Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 1, 2021, 107.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                                 11
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                          Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                    Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                           Section: Theme




4. Focus: the legacy of the Italian green pass.

    An underlying strategy like the one of the Italian green pass is a powerful instrument.
    Abstracting from the pandemic contingency, its novelty consists of conditioning the
possibility to do (almost) any job – instead of some specific jobs, like in general do the
prerequisites to carry out a job (see supra, Section 3) – to relating workers’ personal choices
aimed to comply with a public policy goal. Choices that formally remain free, but that must
be oriented in a specific direction, not to encounter a series of obstacles making the work
experience uncertain, uneven and at risk of repeated interruptions. A regulatory scheme, thus,
according to which work becomes a generalised leverage to make people assume determined
behaviours influencing (also) their personal life, although these are not imposed by law.
    From the point of view of public authorities, such a regulatory strategy has relevant
advantages. While in the specific case it imposes an implicit obligation to get vaccinated,55
from a more general perspective it enhances the role of employers as State agents,56
entrusting them with the obligation to carry out a systematic compliance check concerning
most of citizens/residents. Reducing public expenses because controls are delegated to
private entities. And increasing their effectiveness, given the important sanctions that could
hit employers if they do not carry out punctual verifications.57
    Despite that, further utilisations of such a broad strategy are limited, first, by the balancing
of constitutional rights that the Italian legislator must conduct when passing a bill. 58 In the
examined case the sacrifice of some constitutional rights – first of all the one to work –59 was
justified only by the need to protect life and health of people – especially the most fragile –
from an extraordinary threaten like Covid-19.60 So, just another comparable emergency is
likely to justify such an intense limitation of other constitutional rights in favour of one of
them. Moreover, a further – structural – limit could be the difficulty to adjust a conditioning
strategy like the one underlying the green pass to other possible emergencies of this age, like
climate change or energetic crisis.
    The possibility to use work as a leverage to influence personal behaviours of employees
is tempting, anyway, also for employers. It lies, for instance, in the idea, expressed by the
vice-president of the OTB foundation few days after the extension of the green pass to all
Italian workers, that in the future:

           Each company will have in its DNA a mission to develop – in the green and social
           domains – a commitment towards sustainability that each employee will undertake
           to comply by signing the employment agreement. In this way, the commitment will


55 Regarding a possible circumvention of Article 32 of Italian Constitution, inter alia, Lazzari C., nt. (28), 13.
56 For French reflections on this point, Meiffret-Delsanto, nt. (24); see also Jubert-Tomasso, nt. (19).
57 Articles 9-quinquies (8) and 9-septies (9), Decreto-Legge n. 52/2021.
58 In argomentum, Morrone A., Il bilanciamento nello stato costituzionale, Giappichelli, Torino, 2014.
59 Article 4 of Italian Constitution.
60 This is the so called ‘solidarity principle’, rooted on Articles 2 and 32 of Italian Consitutiton, see inter alia,

Zoppoli L., Pandemia, lavoro, Costituzione: nuovi equilibri, nuovo bilanciamento?, in Zoppoli L., (ed.), Tutela della salute
pubblica e rapporti di lavoro, in Diritti, Lavori, Mercati, 11, 2021, 59-66.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                             12
     Matteo Avogaro                                                                       Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                 Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                        Section: Theme




           not be only in the labour field, but as well personal, and aimed to share all the targets
           for the common good.61

    Nonetheless, it seems at least doubtful that positive obligations like those envisaged above
could be lawfully integrated in Italian employment agreements, in reason to the limits set to
its object by Articles 2094, 2103 and 2104 Codice Civile, requiring it to be consistent with
the category and the professional profile assigned to the employee, and thus preventing a
further enlargements of the area of employee’s duties in her/his private sphere.62 Anyway,
there might be more subtle methods to functionalize employee’s private sphere to employer’s
interest, that the example of the green pass may encourage. Like introducing, in the
employment agreement, obligations for the employee aimed to prevent her/him to behave
in a specific manner, instead of imposing her/him ‘to do’ something. Leveraging on Article
2104 Codice Civile – that is, the employee’s duty of loyalty – which requests employees not
to behave, outside the labour context, in manners contrasting with duties deriving from the
integration in the employer’s organisation, or anyway not to create conflicts with the
employer’s interest.63 An example might be a clause imposing disciplinary sanctions to an
employee publishing a picture on social networks in contrast with the company’s commercial
campaigns aimed to show strong commitment to some social, ethical or civic goals, in order
to increase business. In this case the situation is more uncertain, since further case-law seems
to exclude relevance for disciplinary reasons of a similar employee’s behaviour, but only
when it integrates the exercise of constitutional rights.64
    Finally, another (low risk) way for employers in order to expand the work-related sphere
in the employee’s personal one, might consist of inviting the employees to ‘voluntarily’ act
as employers’ influencers. For instance, accepting to publish, on their social network profiles,
some posts in which they express their enthusiasm for the latest achievements of their
company.65 That, although mere invitations, might be difficult to refuse for an employee, for
instance precarious, if coming from the employer. While this ‘soft pressure’ would be also
more difficult to demonstrate in a trial, in respect to obligations written in an employment
contract.




61 Alessi A., Speech realised during the conference ‘La forza delle donne’ on 26 October 2021, which extract was
reported on the LinkedIn page of the OTB foundation (English translation of the author of this contribution),
available at https://www.linkedin.com/posts/only-the-brave-foundation_ariannaalessi-laforzadelledonne-
lavoro-activity-6863864616787693569--
Uwi?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web.
62 Inter alia, Alessi C., Articolo 2104 c.c., in Del Punta R., Scarpelli F. (eds.), Codice Commentato del Lavoro, Ipsoa,

2020, 466-472.
63 Cass. 14 June 2004, n. 11220, in Responsabilità Civile e Previdenza, 2005, 453 ff., nt. Veca.
64 Cass. 16 February 2011, n. 3822, in Rivista Italiana di Diritto del Lavoro, 1, 2012, 29 ff., nt. Casciano.
65 Financial Times, The perils of using staff as online influencers, 30 January 2022:

https://www.ft.com/content/2a72dc23-0926-4c84-b026-a139b0a56d7e.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                          13
 Matteo Avogaro                                                           Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                 Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                        Section: Theme




5. Conclusions.

    The point of departure of this contribution was the EU Digital Covid Certificate. A
‘friendly’ instrument that, allowing its holders to move throughout EU internal borders
despite national ‘anti-Covid’ restrictions, addressed them towards vaccination. Since the
latter was the option with less material and economic costs to get such certificate.
    When implementing at national level this instrument, France and Italy seem to have
brought this rationale to the extremes. The adoption of national versions of the EU Digital
Covid Certificate was indeed accompanied by the introduction of a new and wide series of
limitations to access places fundamental for everyday life of people, included workplaces. In
this sense, holding the French pass sanitarie/pass vaccinal, or the Italian green pass/green pass
rafforzato, became the only way to overcome these restrictions. Consequently, also the urgency
to get vaccinated, as the main gateway to obtain a national pass, became more intense.
    In the labour context, the French and Italian passes took the nature of prerequisites to
access workplaces. That is, a half-way solution between a prerequisite to carry out a job and
a workplace safety measure. Although the passes were not proper workplace safety measures
they had, however, also an occupational health and safety dimension. That contributes to
mark a significant distinction between them.
    For the French pass sanitaire/pass vaccinal and the Italian green pass rafforzato, indeed, this
dimension consisted of targeting people subject to a specific risk linked to Covid-19. That is,
a higher exposure to contagion or the possibility to experience worsen consequences if
infected. Adopting a specific pass only for them. In order to push especially these groups of
people most at risk towards vaccination, and so towards a higher level of protection.
    The Italian green pass followed a different path. Configuring risk of Covid-19 contagion as
a generic and omnipresent hazard, it was adopted in Italy for all private and public workers
– including self-employed – and not only for specific groups of workers most at risk. In this
sense, the occupational health and safety dimension of the green pass was to keep workplaces
as much as possible free from presence of people capable to spread the Covid-19 infection.
However, the green pass became, in this way, as well a prerequisite to access any workplace,
unveiling a public health strategy, mostly aimed, rather than to protect workers more at risk
for Covid-19, to force the highest possible number of people to utilise the green pass. And so,
at the end, to get vaccinated.
    Abstracting from the pandemic scenario, this underlying strategy seems to consist of
conditioning the possibility to do (almost) any job – that is, for most people to have a source
of income – to workers’ personal choices aimed to comply with a public policy goal.
Although these choices remain formally free, that is not supported by a legal obligation.
    Focusing on Italy, nonetheless, it seems unlikely that the legislator would utilise such a
strategy outside the pandemic context, given the balancing of constitutional rights that is
required to pass similar bills. The most relevant risk, thus, seems an heterogenesis of
purposes. That is, that employers could take inspiration from such a strategy, and make
extensive use of the work leverage to influence employees’ personal behaviours, for instance
on social networks, to align them with company’s commercial campaigns. Or requesting
employees to act as a sort of ‘voluntary influencers’, using their social profiles to support

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                          14
 Matteo Avogaro                                                                Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                      Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                             Section: Theme




their employer. A trend that shall be carefully monitored, to avoid that the legacy of the
pandemic, in a totally different and less commendable context, would result in a further
extension of job-related obligations in the personal sphere of employees.




                                               Bibliography

Alessi C., Articolo 2104 c.c., in Del Punta R., Scarpelli F. (eds.), Codice Commentato del Lavoro,
Ipsoa, 2020, 466-486;
Angelini L., La sicurezza del lavoro nell’ordinamento europeo, in Working Papers Olympus, 29, 2013,
1-48;
Antonini M., Eid M.A., Falkenbach M. et al., An analysis of the COVID-19 vaccination campaigns
in France, Israel, Italy and Spain and their impact on health and economic outcomes, in Health Policy and
Technology, 24 December 2021, 1-13;
Badel M., Charbonneau A., Lerouge L., Droit de la santé et de la sécurité au travail, Gualino, 2018.
Bottini A., Dal 1° maggio al lavoro senza esibire green pass, in Il Sole 24 Ore, 28 April 2022;
Dalmasso R., Traîtes ou refuzniks? Le délicat renvoi des salariés réfractaires au vaccin, in Droit Social,
2, 2022, 119-123;
De Matteis A., Art. 32 della Costituzione: diritti e doveri in tema di vaccinazione anti-Covid, in
Conversazioni sul lavoro a distanza da agosto 2020 a marzo 2021, 2021, 1-12;
Del Punta R., Diritto del Lavoro, Giuffré, 2021;
Fabre A., Les obligations de vaccination et de présentation d’un passe sanitaire, in Revue de Droit du
Travail, 9, 2021, 512-518;
Favennec-Héry F., La gestion de la sortie de crise sanitaire: la continuité, in Semaine Sociale Lamy,
1959, 2021;
Financial Times, The perils of using staff as online influencers, 30 January 2022;
Gamet L., En quelle mesure l’employeur peut-il prendre en compte le statut vaccinal du salarié?, in Revue
de Droit du Travail, 9, 2021, 484-487;
Gargiulo U., Considerazioni “pragmatiche” su green pass e obblighi del lavoratore, in Diritto della
Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 2, 2021, 1-19, https://doi.org/10.14276/2531-4289.3241;
Gouvernement.fr, «Pass sanitaire»: toutes les réponses à vos questions, 12 July 2021;
Gouvernement.fr, Le «pass vaccinal», mode d’emploi, 23 January 2022;
Gouvernement.fr, Où le «pass sanitaire» est-il obligatoire?, 21 July 2021;
Jubert-Tomasso, La mise en œuvre de la politique vaccinale dans l’entreprise au prix d’une altération de
droit de la santé et de la sécurité au travail, in Revue de Droit du Travail, 9, 2021, 488-492;
Kahn dit Cohen T., La suspension du contrat de travail: pari (politique) et difficultés (juridiques), in
Droit Social, 2, 2022, 113-118;
Lazzari C., Obbligo vaccinale, Green pass e rapporto di lavoro, in Diritto della Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 2,
2021, 1-23, https://doi.org/10.14276/2531-4289.2991;
Mario S., Vella L., Rientro (quasi) immediato per il dipendente che abbia ottenuto il green pass, in Guida
al Lavoro, 12, 2022, 17-20;


https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                               15
 Matteo Avogaro                                                                      Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                            Issue 2, Vol. 15 (2022)
                                                                                                   Section: Theme




Mathieu E., Ritchie H., Ortiz-Ospina E. et al., A global database of COVID-19 vaccinations, in
Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 2, 2021, 947-953, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01122-8;
Mattei A., Obbligo vaccinale e rapporto di lavoro, in WP CSDLE “Massimo D’Antona”.IT, 442,
2021, 1-32;
Meiffret-Delsanto K., Obligation vaccinale contre la Covid-19: une protection de la population nocive
pout l’entreprise?, in Droit Social, 2, 2022, 104-112;
Melis V., Da Aprile graduale addio al green pass, in Quotidiano Lavoro, 28 March 2022;
Milet L., Loi «Passe vaccinal»: quelles conséquences sur la relation de travail?, in Nouvelle Vie Ouvrière,
7 February 2022;
Miscione M., La giurisprudenza sulla legislazione Covid, in Il Lavoro nella Giurisprudenza, 1, 2022,
91-104;
Morrone A., Il bilanciamento nello stato costituzionale, Giappichelli, 2014;
Natullo G., Ambiente di lavoro e tutela della salute, Giappichelli, 2021;
Pascucci P., Delogu A., L’ennesima sfida della pandemia Covid-19: esiste un obbligo vaccinale nei contesti
lavorativi?, in Diritto della Sicurezza sul Lavoro, 1, 2021, 81-117, https://doi.org/10.14276/2531-
4289.2448;
Peruzzi M., Covid-19 e sicurezza sul lavoro, tra obbligo vaccinale e green pass, in Diritto della Sicurezza
sul Lavoro, 2, 2021, 25-31, https://doi.org/10.14276/2531-4289.3200;
Pisani C., Il vaccino per gli operatori sanitari obbligatorio per legge è requisito essenziale per la prestazione,
in Lavoro Diritti Europa, 2, 2021, 1-18;
Pogliotti G., Tucci C., Obbligo green pass anche per chi lavora in smart working, in Il Sole 24 Ore, 15
February 2022;
Pontif V., Vaccination réglementaire: refus constitutif d’une cause réelle et sérieuse de licenciement, in Revue
de Droit du Travail, 2012, 637-638;
Service-Public.fr, Fin du passe vaccinal et du port du masque en intérieur à partir du 14 mars 2022, 14
mach 2022;
Sonnati S., La progressione delle misure di sicurezza e le complessità teoriche e applicative dell’obbligo di
certificazione verde Covid-19 nei luoghi di lavoro, in Labor. Il lavoro nel diritto, 1, 2022, 25-54;
Véricel M., La loi Santé au travail du 2 août 2021 renforce-t-elle réellement la prévention en santé au
travail?, in Revue de Droit du Travail, 12, 2021, 689-701;
Vie publique, Loi du 22 janvier 2022 renforçant les outils de gestion de la crise sanitaire et modifiant le
code de la santé publique, 23 January 2022;
World Health Organization, WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard, 2022;
Zoppoli L., Pandemia, lavoro, Costituzione: nuovi equilibri, nuovo bilanciamento?, in Id. (ed.), tutela
della salute pubblica e rapporti di lavoro, in Diritti, Lavori, Mercati, 11, 2021, 45-75.




Copyright © 2022 Matteo Avogaro. This article is released under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/15768                                                                     16
