What Should Change in Labor Law in 2025: From bans on outsourcing and the waiver of labor credit claims to the time bank system

At a time when the social dialogue agenda is being prepared for a new cycle of discussions, the need for a review of labor legislation emerges strongly (albeit not as a novel issue). With Social Partners aligned on the urgency of resuming negotiations with the new government, it is time to begin (re)defining trajectories and priorities.

Given that the evolving dynamics of the labor market demand continuous updates to solutions and perspectives, the path forward requires careful reflection on both the most recent and more established aspects of the current framework.

Looking back chronologically, it is essential to revisit some of the measures introduced by the latest legislative changes, particularly those stemming from the well-known "Decent Work Agenda."

Among these measures, a range of provisions stand out as fostering potential conflict between the parties and/or posing risks to constitutional principles, generating significant and widespread controversy.

Specifically, we refer to the prohibition of outsourcing in cases of collective dismissal or redundancy due to job elimination. This, among other provisions, constitutes an unreasonable restriction on the freedom of business management. Equally contentious are measures such as the prohibition of waiving labor credit claims and the (questionable) imposition of collective labor agreement provisions on economically dependent self-employed workers operating within the beneficiary company's sphere of activity.

On another front, aligned with the priorities of a new generation of workers and in response to growing pressure to promote the desired work-life balance, the issue of workplace flexibility—both geographic and temporal—deserves particular attention.

On the table are topics such as protections for parental leave and illness, the (re)definition of limits and mechanisms for organizing working time, or teleworking regulations. Despite commendable progress, these regulations still do not fully align with the realities of contemporary labor relations.

In this context, it might be pertinent to reconsider the time bank system, reviving the possibility for workers and employers to individually agree on the implementation of a mechanism capable of effectively tailoring work arrangements to their respective needs.

Lastly, it would also be timely to revitalize dormant or underutilized mechanisms. Consider, for example, the regime for dismissal due to unsuitability, which, in practice, has remained unenforced, existing as little more than a dead letter in the law since its introduction. Similarly, disciplinary procedures and rules governing absences from work, given their crucial role in everyday labor relations, require further development and practical application.