10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778
This article analyses work integration social enterprises (WISEs) as private organisations that promote and pursue general interest, namely, the right of people with disabilities to work and to be integrated into the labour market. Both EU law and the Italian 2017 Social Enterprises Reform Act enhance the activities and the role of WISEs. Their legal characters and innovation will be discussed.
application/pdf
1561-8048
11778
2
en
Alceste Santuari
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Italian Labour Law e-Journal
Right to work of people with disabilities
Work integration social enterprises (WISEs): a legal and innovative form to promote the right to work of people with disabilities 
Text.Serial.Journal
https://illej.unibo.it/
13
Miscellaneous
2020-12-21
2020-11-16
2020-12-21
2020-12-21
145-158
ILLeJ
Alceste Santuari
2020/12/21
10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778
145
University of Bologna
1561-8048
2
Right to work of people with disabilities
en
158
Work integration social enterprises (WISEs): a legal and innovative form to promote the right to work of people with disabilities 
https://illej.unibo.it/article/download/11778/11866
13
Work integration social enterprises (WISEs): a legal and innovative                           Italian Labour Law e-Journal
form to promote the right to work of people with disabilities                                        Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
Alceste Santuari                                                                                           ISSN 1561-8048
Alceste.santuari@unibo.it                                                   https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778




       Work integration social enterprises (WISEs): a legal
      and innovative form to promote the right to work of
                    people with disabilities
                                                   Alceste Santuari


  1. Introduction. 2. The right to work of people with disabilities. 3. WISEs: aims, activities
  and legal characters. 4. The EU legal framework for Social enterprises: a brief overview. 5.
  WISEs in the Italian legal system. 6. Concluding remarks.



                                                          Abstract

      This article analyses the activities and the role played by work integration social enterprises
      (WISEs). The article aims to prove that the specific legal character of WISEs, which are
      enhances both by EU law and by the Italian 2017 Social Enterprises Reform Act, help strengthen
      the right to work and integration of people with disabilities, thus increasing social cohesion,
      especially at the local community level.

      Keywords: Social enterprises; Work integration; People with disabilities; Right to work of
      people with disabilities




  1. Introduction.

     Marketisation, globalisation, financial crises, health budget restraints and the recent
  pandemic appear to undermine individuals’ fundamental rights1, including the right to work
  of persons with disabilities. Sometimes, it seems as though these rights fall out of the


  
    Professor of Non-profit law, University of Bologna. The article has been submitted to a double-blind peer
  review process.
  1 See for example, Newdick C., From Hippocrates to Commodities: three models of NHS governance: NHS governance,

  regulation, Mid Staffordshire inquiry, health care as a commodity, in Medical law review, Vol. 22, 2, 2014, 162-179.
  Globalisation “has significantly affected the law and economics approach, causing a re-thinking of the
  mechanisms of balance and un-balance between economic freedoms and individual rights. Accordingly, new
  systems of regulation are required to adequately and effectively match new social and economic needs.”
  Stefanelli M.A., Prefazione, in Stefanelli M.A. (ed.), Dopo la globalizzazione: sfide alla società e al diritto, Giappichelli,
  Torino, 2017, 2.
Alceste Santuari                                                                               Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                      Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                      Section: Miscellaneous


obligation of modern welfare states or even represent a burden to growth and
competitiveness.2
   In this economic and political context, it is all the more difficult for people with disabilities
to find effective protection and organisational solutions to match their needs, including
adequate jobs.3 People with disabilities may generally find a job either in public offices or in
private businesses. In some legal systems, public authorities and private companies may even
be compelled to employ a given percentage of persons with disabilities out of the total
number of workers.4 These legal provisions have reportedly increased the chances for people
with disabilities to find steady job positions. Yet, the whole mandatory employment system
for people with disabilities has shown a rigid and bureaucratic approach to this issue. It has
especially highlighted a gap between potential employers and the public agencies in charge
of finding an adequate matching for persons with disabilities. Furthermore, even when this
matching is found, enterprises are not capable of providing disadvantaged people with
effective on-the-job training programmes that may contribute to enhancing their
professional skills.5
   By contrast, such a possibility is offered by work integration social enterprises (WISEs),
the exclusive aim of which is to integrate people with disabilities into work through carrying
out any kind of industrial, commercial or service activity.6 WISEs and their activities have
been legally recognised and provided for both by EU law7 and national legislation.8
   Against this background, the article intends to investigate the legal characters and the role
of WISEs. The article is divided into six sections. Section 1 sets out the background upon
which the article has been drafted. Section 2 deals with work integration as an individual’s
fundamental right. Section 3 analyses the aims pursued, the activities carried out and the main
legal characters of WISEs. Section 4 points out to the EU legal framework concerning
WISEs. Section 5 deepens the legal characters and the activities of WISEs as provided for
by the Italian 2017 Social Enterprises Reform Act. Finally, Section 6 includes some remarks
on the potentials of WISEs.


2 Vanherke B., Sabato S., Bouget D., Conclusions. Social policy in the EU: high hopes but low yields, in Vanherke B.,
Sabato S., Bouget D. (eds.), Social policy in the European Union: state of play 2017, European Trade Union Institute
(ETUI) and European Social Observatory (OSE), Brussels, 2017, 201.
3 The protection of people with disabilities is often either a secondary issue or limited to granting these people

a minimum wage. It is then far from being regarded as a relevant organisational asset by which to enhance
diversity. See Malzani F., Dal collocamento mirato al diversity management. Il lavoro dei disabili tra obbligo e inclusione nella
prospettiva di genere, in Rivista del Diritto della Sicurezza Sociale, Vol. 43, 4, 2019, 717.
4 In Italy, for example, the 1999 Right to work for disabled people Act No. 68 has partly encouraged a number

of active employment policies and the establishing of local networks among public authorities, employment
agencies and economic operators. See Fondazione Cariplo, Il collocamento mirato e le convenzioni ex-art.14. Evidenze
e riflessioni, in Quaderni dell’Osservatorio – Approfondimenti 30, 2019, 97.
5 See Bottà M., Dopo vent’anni di collocamento disabili, 30 October 2020, in https://welforum.it/dopo-venti-anni-

di-collocamento-disabili/, where the Author analyses the pros and cons of the abovementioned 1999 Act. In
particular, the article points out to the mistrust against disability that still dominates a significant share of the
labour market.
6 See Davister C., Defourny J., Gregoire O., Work integration social enterprises in the European Union: An overview of

existing models, EMES, WP No. 04, 2004.
7 See Section 4.
8 According to the Italian 1991 Social Co-operatives Act No. 381, social co-operatives are divided into two

categories: the first one (a) includes those social co-operatives that carry out social, health and training activities.
The second category (b) consists of social co-operatives that carry out any kind of industrial, agricultural or
business activity by integrating people with disabilities into their work process.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                                 146
Alceste Santuari                                                                          Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                 Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                 Section: Miscellaneous


2. The right to work of people with disabilities.

    According to Article 27(1) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(titled “Work and employment”)9, persons with disabilities have to be granted the same
opportunities to gain a living as all other people. This statement intends to contrast with
those circumstances under which persons with disabilities, when they are employed, are more
likely to be offered low-paying jobs, lower occupational levels and worst working conditions
than their colleagues. More often than their peers, people with disabilities are also in part-
time jobs or temporary positions, often with few possibilities for career development.10
    In this respect, the abovementioned Article 27(1) enables persons with disabilities to have
the same right as any other worker to freely choose their work or to be accepted in a labour
market and work environment. Article 27 reinforces the provision of Article 23 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights11 and employs similar wording to that of Article 6
of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.12 It also sets out a
non-exhaustive list of appropriate steps for States parties to take, including through
legislation, to safeguard and promote the realization of the right to work.13
    The combination of the abovementioned legal provisions represents an effective
cornerstone for disabled people’s rights. This recognition amounts to an obligation on the
part of national welfare systems to set up plans whereby to provide people with disabilities
with both training programmes and work environment that may fully respect their individual
needs.14
    National welfare systems may enforce the right of people with disabilities to work through
legislation. This can also imply the setting out of an enabling legal framework that defines
organisational forms whereby people with disabilities are empowered and provided with
effective tools to enhance their professional skills. WISEs represent the legal form under
which people with disabilities can be both empowered and provided with adequate work
facilities.




9 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), 2006.
10 See United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, Covid-19 and the rights of persons with
disabilities: guidance, 29 April 2020, 5; where the OHCHR reports that persons with disabilities “have less access
to social insurance based on employment than others which decreases their economic resilience in the current
COVID-19 context.”
11 “(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work

and to protection against unemployment. (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay
for equal work.”
12 See the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights’ general comments No. 5 (1994) on persons

with disabilities and No. 18 (2005) on the right to work.
13 On this point, with reference to the US system, see Oas D., McCord M., Popejoy S.L., Right to work: a legal

rights perspective, in Labor Law Journal, Vol. 67, 3, 2016, 437-444.
14 Durham J., Brolan C.E., Mukandi B., The convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: A foundation for ethical

disability and health research in developing countries, in American Journal of Public Health, 104, 11, 2014, 2037-2043.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                          147
Alceste Santuari                                                                               Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                      Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                      Section: Miscellaneous


3. WISEs: aims, activities and legal characters.

    WISEs pursue public interest by carrying out a productive and entrepreneurial set of
activities15, thus revealing a market orientation16 and a clear entrepreneurial dimension17,
although WISEs pursue general interest outside the limits of the market and of the state.18
    Along with work integration programmes, WISEs are also capable of deliver ongoing and
tailored follow-up and training: these are expected to provide persons with disabilities with
better professional skills through which they may increase their chances to find a job also
outside WISEs, once their training period has been regarded as satisfactory.19
    Despite WISEs are characterised by either a total or partial non-distribution constraint20,
on carrying out their activities, WISEs tend to show a high propensity to innovate the type
of services they supply as well as the organisation of the services provision.21 Furthermore,
WISEs devote a particular attention to active employment policies, to the empowerment of
users and to the creation of new jobs, especially for hard-to-place people.22
    These organisational characters make WISEs different to the foregoing experiences of
sheltered employment workshops23, from which WISEs partly originate. In particular,
WISEs differ from sheltered workshops at least for three aspects.24 Firstly, they are generally
less dependent on public funds and pay more attention to market dynamics. Such an
evolution has probably also to do with the quality of jobs that persons with disabilities have
progressively developed: from mere mechanic and routine positions, people with disabilities

15 See Reiser D.B., Dean S.A., Social Enterprise Law: Trust, Public Benefit and Capital Markets, Oxford University
Press, Oxford, 2017, 10. See also Bandini F., Gigli S., Mariani L., Social Enterprises and Public Value: A Multiple-
Case Study Assessment, in Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, published online on
5 November 2020.
16 In this respect, the definition of social enterprises as “business-like” organisations is to be carefully

interpreted, since the commercial nature of WISEs, as well as of social enterprises at large, refers to the activity
performed and not to the aim pursued. See Dart R., Being “Business-Like” in a Nonprofit Organization: A Grounded
and Inductive Typology, in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 33, 2, 2004, 290-310; Nicholls A., The legitimacy
of social entrepreneurship’. reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field, in Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Vol. 4,
2010, 611-633.
17 See Defourny J., From third sector to social enterprise, in Borzaga C., Defourny J. (eds.), The emergence of Social

Enterprise, Routledge, London, 2001, 14-18.
18 See Trivedi C., Stokols D., Social Enterprises and Corporate Enterprises: Fundamental Differences and Defining Features,

in The Journal of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 20, 1, 2011, 2.
19 In many Member States of the European Union, WISEs’ mission is supported by public contracts. See,

Nyssens M., European Work Integration Social Enterprises: Between Social Innovation and Isomorphism, in Defourny J.,
HulgårL., Pestoff V. (eds.), Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative
Perspective, Routledge, London, 2014, 218.
20 Some social enterprises, such as traditional “non-profit” organisations, are bound not to distribute any profits

among their members, boards of directors or stakeholders at large. Other social enterprises may instead
distribute profits to a limited extent. In all cases, the social enterprise tends to forbid all profit-maximising
behaviours. See Lind A.J., The non-distribution constraint and social enterprise: Can share capital fund non-profit
organisations?, in Third Sector Review, Vol. 25, 2, 2019, 233.
21 See Bacchiega A., Borzaga C., Social enterprises as incentive structures: An economic analysis, in Borzaga C., Defourny

J. (eds.), The Emergence of Social Enterprise, Routledge, London, 2001, 284.
22 See Stryjan Y., Sweden: The Emergence of Work-integration Social Enterprises, in Borzaga, C., Defourny, J. (eds.), The

Emergence of Social Enterprise, Routledge, London, 2001, 220-235.
23 See May-Simera C., Reconsidering Sheltered Workshops in Light of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons

with Disabilities (2006), in Laws, Vol. 7, 1, 2018, 6; Mark B.G., Hofmayer S., Rauch E., Matt D.T., Inclusion of
Workers with Disabilities in Production 4.0: Legal Foundations in Europe and Potentials Through Worker Assistance Systems,
in Sustainability, Vol. 11, 21, 2019, 5978.
24 Davister C., Defourny J., Gregoire O., nt. (6).



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                                 148
Alceste Santuari                                                                            Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                   Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                   Section: Miscellaneous


have been trained to perform higher standard jobs. Added to this, structured professional
training programmes, which are aimed to enhance the employability of persons with
disabilities in the labour market25, have improved the competencies and qualification of
disabled workers.26
    Secondly, WISEs pursue the objective to ensure that employed disadvantaged people earn
income comparable with that of other workers27, thus enforcing article 27(1) of the
Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities and other national constitutional
principles.28
    Thirdly, whereas traditional sheltered workshops were mostly involved in passive labour
policies, WISEs are tools of active labour policies for people with disabilities. In this respect,
national and local governments have taken action to mix work integration programmes with
other policies, such health and social care, education, employment29 and environmental
services.30
    Part of the reputation of social enterprises at large and of WISEs in particular stems out
of their being deeply rooted in local communities. Here proximity between supply and
demand might help create new opportunities for persons with disabilities. Close links with
local communities also enable WISEs a) to tune in with local needs, b) to contribute to the
creation of social value31 and social capital, c) to benefit local communities32, especially by
increasing local development and social cohesion33and d) to enhance the sense of identity,
safe space and social networks.34 In this way, WISEs build up inclusive protection systems
against vulnerabilities and social risks35, including the capability of proving to be resilient
organisational frameworks.36

25 For a wider presentation and a theoretical analysis of the work-integration initiatives, see Defourny J., Favreau
L., Laville J. (eds.), Insertion et nouvelle économie sociale: un bilan international, Desclée de Brouwer, (Socio-Économie),
Paris, 1998.
26 See also Visonà S., Il lavoro nella riforma del Terzo settore, in Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, 1, 2018, 73-75.
27 For an interesting analysis of wages in social enterprises, see Becchetti L., Castriota S., Wage Differentials in

Italian Social Enterprises, in Economia politica, 3, 2011, 323-368.
28 This is the case of Article 3(2) of the Italian Constitution, which provides for a general obligation on the part

of public institutions, private companies and civil society organisations to remove any economic and social
obstacle which may hinder the full promotion of human dignity of any individual and the real participation of
workers in the political, economic and social life of the Country.
29 See the 2015 Work integration and social inclusion of fragile and vulnerable people through the integration

of public employment, health and social care services Act passed by the Italian Region Emilia-Romagna.
30 See, for example, the case of Eco-WISEs in Austria: the Ecological Work Integration Social Enterprise are

aimed to integrate disadvantaged people into the labour market by carrying out environmentally-related
activities. See, Anastasiadis M., Lang R., Social Enterprise in Austria: A Contextual Approach to Understand an
Ambiguous Concept, in ICSEM Working Papers, No. 26, 2016, 15-16.
31 On the social value created by WISEs in Italy, see Chiaf E., Il valore creato dalle imprese sociali di inserimento

lavorativo, in Impresa Sociale, Vol. 0, 2013, 21-37.
32 See Melkas H., Koskela V., Oikarinen T., Konsti-Laakso S., Do Finnish work integration enterprises benefit the

community?, in Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, Vol. 11, 2, 2017, 59-70.
33 Vulnerable users of WISEs’ activities represent a strong element of legitimacy of these mission-driven

organisations both as to their social impact and as far as their employment and economic capacity is concerned.
See Depedri S., Boglioni M., L’inserimento lavorativo avvantaggia solo i soggetti svantaggiati? Un’analisi costi-benefici
applicata ad alcune cooperative sociali aderenti al Consorzio Sociale Unitario G. Zorzetto di Venezia, Research Report
EURICSE, 2012, 17-18.
34 OECD, Perspectives on Global Development 2012: Social Cohesion in a Shifting World, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2011.
35 Fonseca X., Lukosch S., Brazier F., Social cohesion revisited: a new definition and how to characterize it, in Innovation:

The European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 32, 2, 2019, 231–253.
36 Cheney G., Santa Cruz I., Peredo A.M., Nazareno E., Worker cooperatives as an organizational alternative: Challenges,

achievements and promise in business governance and ownership, in Organization, Vol. 21, 5, 2014, 593.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                             149
Alceste Santuari                                                                                    Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                           Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                           Section: Miscellaneous


   The close links with local communities are also expressed in the internal governance of
WISEs. Like all other social enterprises, WISEs too present an inclusive, democratic and
multi-stakeholder governance system.37 This enables volunteers, workers, including people
with disabilities, beneficiaries and public authorities to take actively part in the decision-
making process of the enterprise also by serving on the board of directors.
   The multi-stakeholder organisation revolves around the democratic principle that has
traditionally inspired all mutual and co-operative societies around the world. In these
organisations, the decision-making process is not proportionate to the capital invested in the
company but it is rather based on the “one head, one vote” principle. Accordingly, members
take part in the general meeting and in the enterprises’ management on a democratic and
participatory rule, which strongly values the active engagement of users and workers,
including persons with disabilities.
   This requirement plays an important role because it allows persons with disabilities to take
actively and personally part in the decision-making process concerning their work conditions.
Hence, the integration of people with disabilities is ensured both within the organisation and
through its activities as long as their engagement in WISEs is not transitional. The decision-
making process necessarily implies a long-run programming and duration: short employment
times would not be consistent with decisions that have consequences for the future of the
enterprise.38


4. The EU legal framework for Social enterprises: a brief overview.

   Social enterprises, including WISEs, owe much of their development to academic
research projects39, to an EU enabling legal framework and to a number of the EU
Commission’s Action Plans.40 Although at the EU level, social enterprise is a notion that is
far from being a comprehensive one41 and in most Member States it encompasses a wide


37 An inclusive and democratic governance is among the requirements provided for by the EU Commission to
recognise the legal form of social enterprise. See Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European economic and social committee and the Committee of the Regions.
Social Business Initiative. Creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation,
Brussels 25.10.2011 COM(2011) 682 final.
38 See Davister C., Defourny J., Gregoire O., nt. (6).
39 See, among others, Cafaggi F., Iamiceli P., New Frontiers in the Legal Structure and Legislation of Social Enterprises

in Europe: A Comparative Analysis, in EUI-LAW Working Papers, No. 16, 2008.
40 See European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council,

the European economic and social committee and the Committee of the Regions. Social Business Initiative.
Creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation.
Brussels, 25.10.2011, COM(2011) 682 final; European Commission, Communications “A new industrial
Strategy for Europe” and “An SME Strategy for a sustainable and digital Europe”, 10th March 2020. Both
these Communications recognise the existence of Social economy enterprises, including WISEs, and their role
in the twin transition, as well as the need to use the European Pillar of Social Right as a compass towards green
and socially fair transition. See also Bassi A., Fabbri A., Under pressure: Evolution of the social economy institutional
recognition in the EU, in Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, Vol. 91, 3, 2020, 411-433; Angeli M., Cinque S.,
Impresa sociale e concorrenza, in Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, 1, 2018, where the Authors underline how social
economy plays a fundamental role in pursuing the priorities set out in the Europe 2020 strategy (152).
41 Fici A., A European Statute for Social and Solidarity-Based Enterprise, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and

Constitutional Affairs, 2017, 8.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                                       150
Alceste Santuari                                                                          Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                 Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                 Section: Miscellaneous


range of different legal organisations carrying out various activities42, social enterprise is
commonly recognised and accepted as a uniform definition.43 In this respect, the “2008 Small
Business Act”44 has recognised social enterprises as operators in the social economy45 whose
main objective is to have a social impact on local communities rather than making a profit
for the benefit of their owners/shareholders.46
   Social economy enterprises are particularly apt to deliver Social Services of General
Interest (SSGIs).47 These include services that benefit the community at large and are
necessary to ensure the accomplishment of individuals’ fundamental rights, including the
right to work of persons with disabilities. Pursuant to Article 14 of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, Member States are responsible for outlining the legal
and organisational framework for SSGIs. Accordingly, over the years, Member States’ legal
systems have created favourable legal environment within which social enterprises are
preferred to deliver SSGIs due to their legal and organisational features.48
   The characters of social enterprises have also inspired Directive 2014/24/EU concerning
public procurement, which entails specific legal provisions relating to social enterprises at
large and WISEs in particular.49 According to Article 77 (1) (2) of this Directive, public
authorities may reserve the awarding of public contracts in the health, social and cultural
services to social enterprises that must comply with the following conditions:
   (a) their objective is the pursuit of a public service mission;
   (b) any profits must be reinvested with a view to achieving the organisation’s objective.
Where profits are distributed or redistributed, they should be based on participatory
considerations;
   (c) the structures of management or ownership of the organisation performing the
contract are based on employee ownership or participatory principles, or require the active
participation of employees, users or stakeholders; and




42 Felicetti R., L’impresa sociale negli altri ordinamenti, in Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, 1, 2018, 222.
43 European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, Social Enterprises
and their Eco-systems: Developments in Europe, 2016; Fici A., nt. (41).
44 European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the Council, European Parliament, the

European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. “Think Small First” A “Small
Business Act” for Europe, Brussels, 25.6.2008 COM(2008) 394 final.
45 See Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘The Economy for the Common Good: a sustainable

economic model geared towards social cohesion’ (own-initiative opinion) (2016/C 013/06), where social
enterprises are regarded as “Entrepreneurs for the common good”. See also Opinion of the European Economic
and Social Committee on ‘Principles for effective and reliable welfare provision systems’, (2016/C 013/08),
where the role of WISEs is valued (par. 4.7.).
46 See European Economic and Social Committee, Recent evolutions of the Social Economy in the European Union,

Study, 2019.
47 European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, Second biennal

report on Social Services of General Interest, Brussels, 2011, where the services for the benefit of people with
disabilities are regarded as the Commission’s commitment to social services quality (58).
48 On the role of social enterprises in delivering services of general interest, see European Commission, OECD,

Policy Brief on Social Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial Activities in Europe, 2013.
49 See Pirvu D., Clipici E., Social Enterprises and the EU’s Public Procurement Market, in Voluntas: International Journal

of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 27, 4, 2016, 1611–1637. See also Argyrou A., Providing social enterprises
with better access to public procurement: The development of supportive legal frameworks, in European Procurement & Public
Private Partnership Law Review (EPPPL), Vol. 12, 3, 2017, 310-324.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                          151
Alceste Santuari                                                                      Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                             Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                             Section: Miscellaneous


   (d) the organisation has not been awarded a contract for the services concerned by the
contracting authority concerned pursuant to this Article within the past three years.50
   It has been previously stated that the European Union proves to be WISE-friendly and it
intends to strengthen the possibility for this type of social enterprises to access to public
procurement to increase the chances of employment for people with disabilities.51 In this
respect, Article 20 of Directive 2014/24/EU recognises that Member States may reserve the
right to sheltered workshops and economic operators to participate in public procurement
procedures. The legal requirement for the recognition of such a right is the accomplishment
of the social and professional integration of disabled or disadvantaged persons. These public
contracts can also be performed within sheltered employment programmes, provided that at
least 30 % of the employees of those workshops, economic operators or programmes are
disabled or disadvantaged workers.52 This percentage is aimed to both effectively get persons
with disabilities involved in work programmes and to avoid false sheltered workshops or
social enterprises to be awarded public contracts.


5. WISEs in the Italian legal system.

   The Italian legal system recognised WISEs even before the European Union did. Article
45 of the Constitution of 1948 bestows a social role on mutual and co-operative societies
whose aim is regarded as beneficial to communities.53 Pursuant to this constitutional
principle, the 1991 Social Co-operatives Act has been the first legislative attempt to value the
public interest pursued by social co-operatives, including WISEs.54 The public benefit goals
that social co-operatives are to accomplish are ensured by the following legal requirements.
Like all social co-operatives, WISEs are not prevented from either making or distributing
profits, if they decide to do so. However, any distribution cannot be higher than 2% of the
rate applicable to the bonds issued by the Italian Post Service. Added to this there is no
possibility of distributing any assets or benefits among members and boards of directors
should the co-op be wound up. 55



50 This provision risks of endangering those social and health care services that certainly require continuity of
care, such as elderly or children care programmes.
51 Biggeri M., Testi E., Bellucci M., Enabling Ecosystems for Social Enterprises and Social Innovation: A Capability

Approach Perspective, in Journal of human development and capabilities, Vol. 18, 2, 2017, 299-30.
52 This percentage has been taken from the Italian 1991 Social Cooperatives Act: Section: see infra.
53 The supervision over the accomplishment of the social aim is entrusted both with public authorities and to

cooperatives’ umbrella organisations, which are called upon to check their balance-sheets, among others.
54 The 1991 Act has also paved the way to the legal recognition of a specific collective agreement for social co-

operatives’ workers and of the relevant labour cost. See the administrative order of the Italian Ministry for
Employment and Social Welfare No. 7/2020 of 17 February 2020. The collective agreement also recognises
the propensity of WISEs to carry out on-the-job training together with work integration activities. On the
application of the national collective agreement to WISEs, see the Court of Padua, Labour Judge, ruling No.
295 of 2019. This stated that social cooperatives’ collective agreement is consistent with Article 36 of the Italian
Constitution, which provides that any worker is entitled to a wage that needs to be proportional to the quality
and quantity of their job and anyway enough to ensure them and their family a free and respectable life.
55 These assets, as well as 3% of yearly profits, are to be directed to the mutual funds that are managed by the

co-operative movements’ national associations. These funds are mainly entrusted to support and finance those
co-operative societies that face economic and financial dire straits.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                      152
Alceste Santuari                                                                                    Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                           Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                           Section: Miscellaneous


    In particular, the 1991 Act provides for the direct engagement of people with disabilities
into the work integration process and the co-operatives’ governance systems. In this respect,
when their legal status allows them to freely express their will, Article 4 (2) of the 1991 Act
provides that at least 30% of the whole WISEs’ membership must consist of persons with
disabilities. This percentage witnesses to the Parliament’s intention to recognise “genuine”
WISEs in which persons with disabilities are effectively and actually involved in the co-
operatives’ decision-making process.
    The pursuing of social aims, the work integration of persons with disabilities as well as
the limited profit distribution constraint make WISEs reliable organisations and partners of
public authorities. In this respect, the 1991 Act provides that WISEs may be awarded public
contracts directly without competing for competitive tenders.56 Beyond this amount, public
tenders may include social clauses providing for a reserve right for WISEs.57 Furthermore,
they are granted a specific tax benefit, namely, they do not pay their disadvantaged people’s
social security, which is covered by general taxation. The exception rule to public tenders
and tax benefits for disadvantaged workers amount to the formal and legal recognition of
WISEs’ social mission.58
    However, the work integration of persons with disabilities is no longer the exclusive
sphere of the 1991 Social Co-operatives Act No 381. It has been included as one of the
specific provisions of the 2017 Social Enterprises Reform Act No. 112. This Act has
expanded the legal forms under which work integration of disabled and disadvantaged people
may be accomplished. In this respect, the 2017 Act provides that business companies,
associations and foundations can adopt the legal form of WISEs to pursue their social
mission while performing a wide range of activities of general interest. As in the 1991 Act,
the 2017 Act requests WISEs to a) implement a democratic and multi-stakeholder
governance model, b) disclose a social balance sheet and c) not to distribute any profit or,
alternatively, to distribute it to a very limited extent.
    In accordance with EU law, the 2017 Act empowers local authorities to select WISEs to
award then public contracts or to enter public-private partnerships by which to promote
work integration of people with disabilities. Public authorities may then become partners of
WISEs, though the former can neither take over social enterprises, nor exert any control
over them. This represents a remarkable legal provision because it allows to build up steady
partnerships within the same legal form without hampering the genuine nature of social
enterprises and it helps giving work integration programmes a certain degree of continuity
and sustainability.
    As far as the democratic governance model is concerned, the 2017 Act refers to co-
management and to the multi-stakeholder dimension of social enterprises as essential
features of their legal status. Accordingly, WISEs’ by-laws must allow for the direct
engagement of workers, users and volunteers, which are all to be consulted and invited to



56 To be eligible for these public contracts, WISEs must be listed on a special regional register and the total
amount of these contracts must not exceed a maximum threshold.
57 See Section 4.
58 See Santuari A., Le cooperative sociali e lo svolgimento di attività di interesse generale tra riforma del Terzo settore e normativa

regionale: il ruolo della regolazione pubblica, in Istituzioni del Federalismo, Vol. 1, 2019, 181-206.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                                       153
Alceste Santuari                                                                               Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                      Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                      Section: Miscellaneous


take part in the decision-making process, especially when the decisions affect work
conditions and the quality of the services supplied.59
    Overall, the 2017 Social Enterprises Reform Act recognises the importance of WISEs as
private enterprises whose aim is to pursue the public interest. The reconciliation between
economic drivers and social mission within a legal form enables WISEs to strengthen and
enforce the right to work of people with disabilities. Accordingly, WISEs contribute to lower
public expenditure since otherwise people with disabilities would receive unemployment
subsidies, pensions or other kinds of subsidies should they remain unemployed.60
    Not only are the role and activities carried out by WISEs viewed in the light of their
capacity of increasing employment opportunities and tailored-made training for people with
disabilities. Their performances are also regarded as beneficial to the whole community. This
is why Article 9 (2) of the 2017 Act provides that WISEs subject their activities, projects and
programmes to a social impact assessment.61 This is supposed to value to what extent social
enterprises generate social values for local communities, which remain often silent or
implicit.62 In this respect, WISEs are expected to prove that their activities produce and share
both economic and social value, thus demonstrating that efficiency is no longer enough to
test the usefulness of enterprises.63


6. Concluding remarks.

    WISEs are capable of providing an adequate legal framework whereby people with
disabilities can find steady jobs and effective training programmes also by actively taking part
in the internal decision-making process, where applicable.
    In general, WISEs can be regarded as a valuable complementary system of traditional
employment policies.64 To some extent, WISEs may by-pass the obstacles against investment
in the selection and training of disadvantaged workers, thereby earning the confidence of
public authorities and local communities. Furthermore, if good reputation is achieved,
WISEs may be in a position to supply other employers with reliable information regarding
the actual abilities of trainees, thereby reducing both the costs and the risks that these




59 See Fici A., Disciplina dell'impresa sociale: gli stakeholder, in Impresa Sociale, Vol. 11, 2018, 7-14.
60 See Borzaga C., Loss M., Work Integration Social Enterprises in Italy, EMES, WP 02, 2002, 16.
61 On this topic, see Dufour B., State of the art in social impact measurement: methods for work integration social enterprises

measuring their impact in a public context, in 5th EMES International Research Conference on Social Enterprise: “Building a
scientific field to foster the social enterprise eco-system”, EMES (2015), Helsinki, 2015; Grieco C., Assessing Social Impact
of Social Enterprises. Does One Size Really Fit All?, Springer, 2015.
62 Venturi P., La valutazione d’impatto sociale come pratica “trasformativa”, in Aiccon, Short Paper No. 19, 2019.
63 Carnini Pulino S., Maiolini R., Venturi P., Social Entrepreneurship Policy: Evidences from the Italian Reform,

in Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No 3/2015), Vol. 13, 3, 2019, 77-88; Chiaf E., nt. (31); Chiaf
E., Biazzi G., Corsini A., Il valore creato dall’inserimento lavorativo per il budget pubblici. Il caso delle cooperative sociali
dell’Emilia-Romagna 2016, Centro Studi Socialis, Brescia, 2017; OECD, Policy Brief on Social Impact Measurement for
Social Enterprises. Policies for Social Entreprenurship, European Commission, 2015; Rago S., Venturi P., L’impatto
della cooperazione sociale di inserimento lavorativo in Emilia-Romagna, in Aiccon, 2017.
64 Borzaga C., Santuari A., Social enterprises in Italy: The experience of social co-operatives, in ISSAN Working Papers,

No. 15, 2000.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                                 154
Alceste Santuari                                                                          Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                 Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                                 Section: Miscellaneous


employers would face when hiring them. Consequently, WISEs help both improving the
functioning of the labour market and enforcing the rights of persons with disabilities.65
    WISEs present two specific advantages with respect to other organisations that are
compelled to employ people with disabilities. The first advantage is that they can select and
train employees at a lower cost than other businesses, thanks to the skills that have been
developed through constantly working with disadvantaged workers. Moreover, WISEs can
provide a sort of qualification certificate, which vouches for the worker’s skills acquired on
the training programme, backing it with their reputation as reliable intermediate
organisations. This comparative advantage thus enables WISEs to act as “gateways” from
welfare to productive work: not only do they operate within local welfare systems to increase
the employability degree of persons with disabilities; they also contribute to integrate them
into society at large.66
    Through the nonprofit-constraint, the participatory nature as well as their work
integration approach make WISEs reliable organisations to a range of stakeholders. Firstly,
public authorities are constantly worried that incentives will prove no more than monetary
gifts to employers. In this respect, WISEs’ own mission to integrate people with disabilities
into work may prove more effective in increasing the employability success. Secondly, WISEs
may also prove credible to trade unions. These are notably reluctant to accept exceptions to
minimum pay levels in the form of entry or training wages. In case of WISEs, trade unions’
objections and fears may be overcome by the strong commitment of WISEs to ensuring fair
work conditions, including the right to non-discriminatory wages. In this respect, WISEs are
obliged to grant people with disabilities adequate wages, thus fully respecting workers’ rights
and avoiding work abuses. Such an approach is expected to increase the level of productivity
achieved by disadvantaged workers, which may be employed within WISEs or outside it in
the open labour market.
    Thirdly, WISEs’ involvement of their beneficiaries and volunteers in the membership
and/or in the management of the organization increases their community engagement.
    Fourthly, WISEs warrant special consideration by policy-makers since they prove
successful in selecting, training and integrating disadvantaged workers compared to other
business forms.
    In this respect, public regulation can play a significant role in supporting the development
of WISEs. In particular, the Italian 2017 Social Enterprises Reform Act may account as a
best practice for other jurisdictions.




65 Chui C.H.-K., Shum M.H.Y., Lum T.Y.S., Work integration social enterprises as vessels of empowerment? Perspectives
from employees, in Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development , Vol. 29, 2, 2018, 133-148.
66 Laratta R., Nakagawa S., Work Integration Social Enterprises for People with Disabilities in Japan, in Nonprofit Policy

Forum, Vol. 7, 4, 2016, 496.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                          155
Alceste Santuari                                                                Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                       Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                       Section: Miscellaneous


                                               Bibliography


Anastasiadis M., Lang R., Social Enterprise in Austria: A Contextual Approach to Understand an
Ambiguous Concept, in ICSEM Working Papers, No. 26, 2016, 15-16;
Angeli M., Cinque S., Impresa sociale e concorrenza, in Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, 1, 2018, 151-
174;
Argyrou A., Providing social enterprises with better access to public procurement: The development of
supportive legal frameworks, in European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review
(EPPPL), Vol. 12, 3, 2017, 310-324;
Bacchiega A., Borzaga C., Social enterprises as incentive structures: An economic analysis, in Borzaga
C., Defourny J. (eds.), The Emergence of Social Enterprise, Routledge, London, 2001, 284;
Bandini F., Gigli S., Mariani L., Social Enterprises and Public Value: A Multiple-Case Study
Assessment, in Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 2020;
Bassi A., Fabbri A., Under pressure: Evolution of the social economy institutional recognition in the EU,
in Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, Vol. 91, 3, 2020, 411-433; doi:10.1111/apce.12264;
Becchetti L., Castriota S., Wage Differentials in Italian Social Enterprises, in Economia politica, 3,
2011, 323-368;
Biggeri M., Testi E., Bellucci M., Enabling Ecosystems for Social Enterprises and Social Innovation:
A Capability Approach Perspective, in Journal of human development and capabilities, Vol. 18, 2, 2017,
299-306;
Borzaga C., Loss M., Work Integration Social Enterprises in Italy, EMES, WP No. 02, 2002, 16;
Borzaga C., Santuari A., Social enterprises in Italy: The experience of social co-operatives, in ISSAN
Working Papers, No. 15, 2000;
Bottà M., Dopo vent’anni di collocamento disabili, 30 October 2020, in https://welforum.it/dopo-
venti-anni-di-collocamento-disabili/;
Cafaggi F., Iamiceli P., New Frontiers in the Legal Structure and Legislation of Social Enterprises in
Europe: A Comparative Analysis, in EUI-LAW Working Papers, No. 16, 2008;
Carnini Pulino S., Maiolini R., Venturi P., Social Entrepreneurship Policy: Evidences from the Italian
Reform, in Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No 3/2015), Vol. 13, 3, 2019, 77-88;
Cheney G., Santa Cruz I., Peredo A.M., Nazareno E., Worker cooperatives as an organizational
alternative: Challenges, achievements and promise in business governance and ownership, in Organization,
Vol. 21, 5, 2014, 591-603; doi:10.1177/1350508414539784;
Chiaf E., Il valore creato dalle imprese sociali di inserimento lavorativo, in Impresa Sociale, Vol. 0, 2013,
21-37;
Chiaf E., Biazzi G., Corsini A., Il valore creato dall’inserimento lavorativo per il budget pubblici. Il caso
delle cooperative sociali dell’Emilia-Romagna 2016, Centro Studi Socialis, Brescia, 2017;
Dart R., Being “Business-Like” in a Nonprofit Organization: A Grounded and Inductive Typology, in
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 33, 2, 2004, 290-310;
Davister C., Defourny J., Gregoire O., Work integration social enterprises in the European Union:
An overview of existing models, EMES, WP No. 04, 2004;
Defourny J., From third sector to social enterprise, in Borzaga C., Defourny J. (eds.), The emergence
of Social Enterprise, Routledge, London, 2001, 14-18;
Defourny J., Favreau L., Laville J. (eds.), Insertion et nouvelle économie sociale: un bilan international,
Desclée de Brouwer, (Socio-Économie), Paris, 1998;

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                156
Alceste Santuari                                                                Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                       Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                       Section: Miscellaneous


Depedri S., Boglioni M., L’inserimento lavorativo avvantaggia solo i soggetti svantaggiati? Un’analisi
costi-benefici applicata ad alcune cooperative sociali aderenti al Consorzio Sociale Unitario G. Zorzetto di
Venezia, Research Report EURICSE, 2012, 17-18;
Dufour B., State of the art in social impact measurement: methods for work integration social enterprises
measuring their impact in a public context, in 5th EMES International Research Conference on Social
Enterprise: “Building a scientific field to foster the social enterprise eco-system”, EMES (2015), Helsinki,
2015;
Durham J., Brolan C.E., Mukandi B., The convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: A
foundation for ethical disability and health research in developing countries, in American Journal of Public
Health, 104, 11, 2014, 2037-2043; doi:10.2105/AJPH.2014.302006;
Felicetti R., L’impresa sociale negli altri ordinamenti, in Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, 1, 2018, 221-
254;
Fici A., A European Statute for Social and Solidarity-Based Enterprise, Policy Department for
Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, 2017;
Fici A., Disciplina dell'impresa sociale: gli stakeholder, in Impresa Sociale, Vol. 11, 2018, 7-14;
Fondazione Cariplo, Il collocamento mirato e le convenzioni ex-art.14. Evidenze e riflessioni, in Quaderni
dell’Osservatorio – Approfondimenti 30, 2019, 97;
Fonseca X., Lukosch S., Brazier F., Social cohesion revisited: a new definition and how to characterize
it, in Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 32, 2, 2019, 231–253;
Grieco C., Assessing Social Impact of Social Enterprises. Does One Size Really Fit All?, Springer,
2015;
Chui C.H.-K., Shum M.H.Y., Lum T.Y.S., Work integration social enterprises as vessels of
empowerment? Perspectives from employees, in Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development , Vol.
29, 2, 2018, 133-148; doi:10.1080/02185385.2018.1538899;
Laratta R., Nakagawa S., Work Integration Social Enterprises for People with Disabilities in Japan,
in Nonprofit Policy Forum, Vol. 7, 4, 2016, 487-507; doi:10.1515/npf-2016-0006;
Lind A.J., The non-distribution constraint and social enterprise: Can share capital fund non-profit
organisations?, in Third Sector Review, Vol. 25, 2, 2019, 233;
Malzani F., Dal collocamento mirato al diversity management. Il lavoro dei disabili tra obbligo e inclusione
nella prospettiva di genere, in Rivista del Diritto della Sicurezza Sociale, Vol. 43, 4, 2019, 717;
Mark B.G., Hofmayer S., Rauch E., Matt D.T., Inclusion of Workers with Disabilities in Production
4.0: Legal Foundations in Europe and Potentials Through Worker Assistance Systems, in Sustainability,
Vol. 11, 21, 2019, 5978; doi:10.3390/su11215978;
May-Simera C., Reconsidering Sheltered Workshops in Light of the United Nations Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006), in Laws, Vol. 7, 1, 2018, 6;
Melkas H., Koskela V., Oikarinen T., Konsti-Laakso S., Do Finnish work integration enterprises
benefit the community?, in Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, Vol. 11, 2, 2017, 59-70;
Newdick C., From Hippocrates to Commodities: three models of NHS governance: NHS governance,
regulation, Mid Staffordshire inquiry, health care as a commodity, in Medical law review, Vol. 22, 2, 2014,
162-179; doi:10.1093/medlaw/fwu010;
Nicholls A., The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship’. reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field,
in Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Vol. 4, 2010, 611-633;




https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                157
Alceste Santuari                                                                Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                       Issue 2, Vol. 13 (2020)
                                                                                       Section: Miscellaneous


Nyssens M., European Work Integration Social Enterprises: Between Social Innovation and Isomorphism,
in Defourny J., HulgårL., Pestoff V. (eds.), Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing
European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective, Routledge, London, 2014, 218; 211-229;
Oas D., McCord M., Popejoy S.L., Right to work: a legal rights perspective, in Labor Law Journal,
Vol. 67, 3, 2016, 437-444;
OECD, Perspectives on Global Development 2012: Social Cohesion in a Shifting World, OECD
Publishing, Paris, 2011; https://doi.org/10.1787/persp_glob_dev-2012-en;
OECD, Policy Brief on Social Impact Measurement for Social Enterprises. Policies for Social
Entreprenurship, European Commission, 2015;
Pirvu D., Clipici E., Social Enterprises and the EU’s Public Procurement Market, in Voluntas:
International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 27, 4, 2016, 1611–1637;
Rago S., Venturi P., L’impatto della cooperazione sociale di inserimento lavorativo in Emilia-Romagna,
in Aiccon, 2017;
Reiser D.B., Dean S.A., Social Enterprise Law: Trust, Public Benefit and Capital Markets, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 2017, 10;
Santuari A., Le cooperative sociali e lo svolgimento di attività di interesse generale tra riforma del Terzo
settore e normativa regionale: il ruolo della regolazione pubblica, in Istituzioni del Federalismo, Vol. 1,
2019, 181-206;
Stefanelli M.A., Prefazione, in Stefanelli M.A. (ed.), Dopo la globalizzazione: sfide alla società e al
diritto, Giappichelli, Torino, 2017;
Stryjan Y., Sweden: The Emergence of Work-integration Social Enterprises, in Borzaga, C., Defourny,
J. (eds.), The Emergence of Social Enterprise, Routledge, London, 2001, 220-235;
Trivedi C., Stokols D., Social Enterprises and Corporate Enterprises: Fundamental Differences and
Defining Features, in The Journal of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 20, 1, 2011, 2, 1-32;
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, Covid-19 and the rights of
persons with disabilities: guidance, 29 April 2020, 5;
Vanherke B., Sabato S. and Bouget D., Conclusions. Social policy in the EU: high hopes but low
yields, in Vanherke B., Sabato S. and Bouget D. (eds.), Social policy in the European Union: state of
play 2017, European Trade Union Institute (ETUI) and European Social Observatory (OSE),
Brussels, 2017, 201;
Venturi P., La valutazione d’impatto sociale come pratica “trasformativa”, in Aiccon, Short Paper No.
19, 2019;
Visonà S., Il lavoro nella riforma del Terzo settore, in Analisi Giuridica dell’Economia, 1, 2018, 73-75.




Copyright © 2020 Alceste Santuari. This article is released under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License




https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/11778                                                                158
