{"id":30500,"date":"2025-05-15T18:42:32","date_gmt":"2025-05-15T16:42:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/allavellilegal.com\/blog\/?p=30500"},"modified":"2025-05-15T18:42:32","modified_gmt":"2025-05-15T16:42:32","slug":"straining-the-role-of-the-work-environment-in-its-configurability","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/allavellilegal.com\/blog\/en\/straining-the-role-of-the-work-environment-in-its-configurability\/","title":{"rendered":"Straining: the role of the work environment in its configurability"},"content":{"rendered":"

Our legal system establishes that \u201cthe employer is required, in the conduct of the business, to adopt the measures that, according to the specific nature of the work, experience and technique, are necessary to protect the physical integrity and moral personality of the employee\u201d<\/em> (Art. 2087 of the Italian Civil Code).<\/p>\n

This obligation imposes a fundamental responsibility on the employer, as the latter is required to adopt all necessary prevention and safety measures for the benefit of their employees.<\/p>\n

In connection with this duty is also the obligation to ensure that the workplace remains calm and harmonious.<\/p>\n

However, it is often the case that situations of forced stress<\/em> arise, which can be qualified as straining<\/em><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

This term refers to a form of psychological pressure which, although it does not constitute systematic and repeated behavior (as in the case of mobbing<\/em>), can nonetheless cause harmful consequences.<\/p>\n

Straining<\/em><\/strong> occurs when the employer, or someone acting on their behalf, engages in stressful and exhausting behavior that harms the employee\u2019s psychological well-being.
\nThe defining and significant element of this behavior is the intent to cause harm<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Typical examples of straining<\/em><\/strong> include demotion, de-skilling, deprivation of work tools, isolation, forced inactivity, and exclusion from the flow of information.<\/p>\n

The Italian Supreme Court, with ruling no. 969\/2023, held that a violation of Art. 2087 of the Civil Code can be recognized not only when the employer or their subordinates directly engage in harmful conduct towards employees, but also when the employer, even through negligence, allows the continuation of a stressful environment that endangers workers\u2019 health.<\/p>\n

This contributes to worsening the effects and the severity of the harm caused to the worker\u2019s personality and health.<\/p>\n

Alongside straining<\/em><\/strong>, there is another form of workplace violence known as mobbing<\/em><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

This behavior constitutes a more severe and aggressive pattern than the one previously described. The concept is based on conduct involving humiliation, isolation, and ultimately, progressive exclusion from the company context.
\nThe key element of mobbing<\/em> is its repetitive nature (the intention to carry out a deliberate scheme aimed at harassing the employee<\/em>).<\/p>\n

In light of such situations, if a worker decides to bring the matter before a judge, it is advisable that they be equipped with at least:<\/p>\n