This essay examines the complex regulation concerning the transfer of activities by public administrations under Article 31 of Legislative Decree No. 165 of 2001. It analyzes the scope of the rule and the authorities empowered to order the transfer and to derogate from the relevant provi-sions. The article then delves into the relationship with the legal concept of a business transfer. It clarifies that there is no overlap between the two regulations: when a genuine business transfer can be established, only Article 2112 of the Civil Code applies, even if the transfer occurs between pub-lic administrations. Conversely, when there is no transfer of a business or a business unit, but rather a transfer of public functions, Article 31 applies. This distinction also resolves any doubts about the legislation’s compatibility with Directive 2001/23/EC, which expressly excludes administrative reorganizations between public bodies from its scope. Furthermore, the article addresses the selection and consent of employees to be transferred, with specific reference to the issues raised by access to public employment through a public competitive tender, as established by Article 97 of the Constitution.
Il saggio affronta la complessa disciplina del trasferimento di attività da parte delle pubbliche amministrazioni ex art. 31 d.lgs. n. 165/2001, analizzandone l’ambito applicativo e le fonti abilitate a disporre il trasferimento e a derogare alla relativa disciplina. Segue l’approfondimento circa i rapporti con la fattispecie del trasferimento di azienda. Si chiarisce che non sussiste sovrapposizione tra le due norme: quando è configurabile un effettivo trasferimento di azienda, trova applicazione esclusivamente l’art. 2112 c.c., anche se questo interviene tra pubbliche amministrazioni; diversamente, quando non si verifica un trasferimento d’azienda o di un ramo di essa ma solo di funzioni pubbliche, opera l’art. 31. Tale distinzione, peraltro, vale a risolvere i dubbi di compatibilità della normativa con la direttiva 2001/23/CE, che esclude espressamente dal proprio ambito applicativo le riorganizzazioni amministrative tra enti pubblici. Si affrontano, inoltre, i temi della se-lezione e del consenso dei lavoratori da trasferire, anche con riferimento alle problematiche poste dall’accesso all’impiego pubblico tramite concorso ex art. 97 Cost.
SPUNTI PER UN NUOVO DIBATTITO SUL PASSAGGIO DEI DIPENDENTI PUBBLICI PER EFFETTO DI TRASFERIMENTO DI ATTIVITÀ
Antonio Preteroti
2025
Abstract
This essay examines the complex regulation concerning the transfer of activities by public administrations under Article 31 of Legislative Decree No. 165 of 2001. It analyzes the scope of the rule and the authorities empowered to order the transfer and to derogate from the relevant provi-sions. The article then delves into the relationship with the legal concept of a business transfer. It clarifies that there is no overlap between the two regulations: when a genuine business transfer can be established, only Article 2112 of the Civil Code applies, even if the transfer occurs between pub-lic administrations. Conversely, when there is no transfer of a business or a business unit, but rather a transfer of public functions, Article 31 applies. This distinction also resolves any doubts about the legislation’s compatibility with Directive 2001/23/EC, which expressly excludes administrative reorganizations between public bodies from its scope. Furthermore, the article addresses the selection and consent of employees to be transferred, with specific reference to the issues raised by access to public employment through a public competitive tender, as established by Article 97 of the Constitution.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
