Vertenza di Lavoro: How an Individual Labour Dispute Works in Italy

A vertenza di lavoro is an individual dispute arising out of an employment-type relationship, unpaid wages, a disputed inquadramento, TFR, or a contested dismissal among them. Italian procedure gives a worker two conciliation routes before litigation, and its own dedicated court procedure once litigation starts. Neither route requires a lawyer, though most workers use one once the dispute reaches court.

This page maps the general vertenza procedure. Where the dispute is specifically a contested dismissal, a separate and stricter clock also applies; see licenziamento illegittimo for that detail in full.

Information verified on 21 July 2026. This page provides general legal information and does not constitute legal advice for an individual situation.

What counts as a vertenza di lavoro

Art. 409 c.p.c. sets the scope of the special labour procedure, the rito del lavoro, covering disputes over: private subordinate employment relationships; certain agrarian relationships (mezzadria, colonia parziaria, and related contracts); agency, commercial representation and other coordinated, continuous, mainly personal collaboration relationships; employment with public bodies that carry out mainly economic activity; and most other public-sector employment relationships, except where a different court is assigned by law.

A vertenza can concern almost anything within that relationship: unpaid or miscalculated wages, a disputed inquadramento (job classification and pay level), unpaid TFR, a disciplinary sanction, or a contested dismissal. The procedure below is common to all of them; a contested dismissal additionally triggers the separate impugnazione clock described further down.

Two conciliation routes before you sue

Italian procedure gives a worker two distinct, non-exclusive ways to attempt a resolution before filing suit.

The judicial tentativo di conciliazione (art. 410 c.p.c.). A worker who intends to bring a claim over an art. 409 relationship may promote a prior conciliation attempt before a commissione di conciliazione, acting alone or through the trade union they belong to or have given a mandate to. This step is optional, the text says the worker "può promuovere" (may promote), not that they must, following the reform that removed the earlier mandatory version of this step.

Conciliazione monocratica (art. 11, D.Lgs. 124/2004). Separately, a worker can raise the matter with the Ispettorato Territoriale del Lavoro (the successor body to the old Direzione provinciale del lavoro this article still refers to) by requesting an ispettivo intervention. Where the request shows the makings of a conciliable dispute, a single official can open a conciliazione monocratica between the parties, either before any inspection begins (preventiva) or during one already underway.

Conciliazione monocratica step by step

The request goes to the Ispettorato Territoriale del Lavoro as a richiesta di intervento ispettivo. If the office sees grounds for a conciliated outcome, an official, who may hold an ispettivo qualification, convenes the parties. Either side may be assisted by a trade union, another organisation, or a professional they have specifically mandated.

If the parties reach an agreement, the resulting verbale is not subject to the ordinary right under art. 2113, first to third commi, c.c. to challenge a waiver of employment rights within a set period, a protection that otherwise lets a worker undo an unfavourable private settlement. To become directly enforceable, the verbale still needs to be declared esecutivo by decree of the competent judge, on the request of the interested party. Payment of any agreed sums, together with the related social-security and insurance contributions, closes the underlying ispettivo procedure. If the parties do not reach an agreement, or one side does not appear, the Ispettorato resumes its ordinary inspection activity instead.

This route is free and does not require filing a court case first, which makes it a common first step for wage-related claims in particular.

The judicial tentativo di conciliazione in more detail

Where a worker instead uses the art. 410 c.p.c. route, the request, signed by the worker, is delivered or sent by raccomandata with return receipt, with a copy sent the same way to the other side. It must state the parties' identifying details, where the employment relationship arose or where the business is located, where communications should be sent, and the facts and reasons behind the claim.

If the employer wishes to take part, it must file a memoria with its defences within 20 days of receiving the copy of the request; if it does not, either party is free to go straight to court. Where the employer does respond, the commissione fixes a hearing within the following 10 days, to be held within a further 30 days.

How long you have: prescrizione and the wage-claim rule

Wage-related claims are periodic payments in the sense of art. 2948, n. 4, c.c. (everything payable yearly or at shorter intervals), which sets a five-year prescription period; termination-related indemnities, including TFR, are separately covered by the five-year period at art. 2948, n. 5, c.c.

A five-year clock sounds short for a debt that can build up over an entire employment relationship, and historically it was treated that way. The Corte Costituzionale, in sentenza n. 63/1966, held that the part of art. 2948, n. 4, c.c. allowing prescrizione on a wage claim to run while the employment relationship is still ongoing was unconstitutional, on the reasoning that a worker is not realistically free to sue an employer they still depend on for their livelihood. The practical effect is that this five-year clock, for wage claims arising during an existing relationship, is treated as suspended until the relationship ends, rather than running year by year against each unpaid amount as it falls due. This is a long-standing constitutional principle rather than a fixed statutory number, and how it interacts with a particular relationship's own facts is not something a general page like this one can resolve for an individual reader.

When it's a dismissal: the extra impugnazione clock

A vertenza over a dismissal specifically carries an additional, shorter and separate deadline on top of everything above. Art. 6, L. 604/1966 requires the worker to challenge the dismissal, in any written form, within 60 days of receiving it in writing, then, within a further 180 days, either file a ricorso with the tribunale, sezione lavoro, or notify the employer of a request to open conciliation or arbitration. Missing either step forfeits the challenge regardless of the strength of the underlying claim.

Requesting either conciliation route described above, the judicial tentativo or the conciliazione monocratica, can interrupt prescrizione and suspend a running decadence deadline for the duration of the attempt plus the 20 days that follow its conclusion, under art. 410, second comma, c.p.c. This is why raising the dispute through one of these channels promptly matters even where a worker expects to end up in court regardless. For the full detail on dismissal categories, the judge-set indemnity band, and a 2025 ruling that extends the 60-day clock for an incapacitated worker, see licenziamento illegittimo.

Filing the ricorso: the rito del lavoro

Once conciliation is not attempted, fails, or is refused, the dispute proceeds under the rito del lavoro. The domanda is filed by ricorso (art. 414 c.p.c.), stating the court, the parties' identifying details, the subject of the claim, the facts and legal grounds relied on, and the evidence the worker intends to use.

Once filed, the judge fixes the hearing date by decree within five days, and no more than 60 days may pass between filing and the hearing (art. 415 c.p.c.). The ricorso and the decree must then be served on the employer within 10 days of the decree, with at least 30 days required between service and the hearing itself, extended to 40 and 80 days respectively where service must be made abroad.

Scenario: unpaid overtime

A worker believes their employer has systematically failed to pay overtime for the past two years, while the relationship is still ongoing. Two realistic first steps exist before litigation: a written request directly to the employer, and a richiesta di intervento ispettivo to the Ispettorato Territoriale del Lavoro, which can open a conciliazione monocratica at no cost.

Because the relationship is ongoing, the Corte Cost. 63/1966 principle means the five-year prescrizione clock on the unpaid overtime is not simply running out month by month while the worker stays employed; raising the claim promptly all the same, in writing or through one of the conciliation routes, avoids any dispute later about when the employer was first put on notice. If conciliation does not resolve the matter, the worker's next step is a ricorso to the giudice del lavoro under the rito del lavoro described above.

For the related severance-pay calculation, see TFR, Italian severance pay. For the wider Italy employment coverage on this site, see the Italy employment law hub.