Sara Guglielmetti A LuccaIn Tuscany, a woman was reportedly fired for excessive absences, which were due to cancer treatment. Now, the court has ruled in her favor and ordered her reinstatement. Here are all the details of what happened.
Lucca, assistant fired after cancer treatment: too many absences
In Lucca , a woman employed in a school was reportedly fired due to excessive absences (due to cancer treatment): she had in fact exceeded the so-called grace period.
In addition to her dismissal, the woman was also reportedly ordered to recover approximately €100.000 for wages earned during the periods in which she was absent from work. As Il Tirreno reports , in the first instance, the court declared the dismissal unlawful and ordered her reinstatement and payment of wages accrued from April 2025 until her return to school.
The Court also blocked the recovery action initiated by the administration to obtain the restitution of €97.692, money corresponding to the salaries received by the woman during periods of sick leave.
Lucca, assistant fired after cancer treatment: Court orders reinstatement
According to reports, the Ministry of Education and Merit will have to reinstate an administrative assistant at a school in Lucca, also recognizing her accrued salary from April 2025 until her actual return to work.
As we've just seen, the Labor Court ruled that the dismissal of the woman, who suffers from a serious oncological condition, was unlawful and discriminatory. The first-instance ruling also blocked the administration's claim for the restitution of €97.692 earned during her years of illness. According to the judge, as reported in La Nazione , "the administration should have informed the employee in advance of the imminent expiration of the sick leave period , thus allowing her to evaluate whether to request unpaid leave or return to work, subject to a medical check and the adoption of reasonable accommodations compatible with her disability. The school, however, applied the general rules regarding sick leave to the employee, without excluding absences attributable to her certified disability from the calculation . This conduct, according to the ruling, resulted in discriminatory treatment ." Furthermore, the school allegedly let several years pass before intervening. This delay, according to the judge, would have created a legitimate expectation in the employee that the employment relationship would continue. The administration could therefore not retroactively correct its own mistake through immediate dismissal, accompanied by the demand for the return of wages already paid.