Dispute Regulation in Essential Public Services in Italy: Strengths and Weaknesses of a `Pluralist Approach'

Abstract

This article analyses the system of dispute regulation in essential public services in Italy as an example of the strengths and weaknesses of a pluralist approach to the issue under examination. That is, an approach which, in one of the few EU countries where the right to strike is constitutionally protected, assigns important regulatory responsibilities to the parties — trade unions and employers — under the supervision of a newly created authority, the Guarantee Commission. The article stresses how such an approach has proved on the whole to be rather effective, capable of reconciling the employees' right to strike with the citizens' rights equally protected by the constitution. However, discussing the case of a massive wildcat dispute in the local transport system, it also underlines how this approach is doomed to fail whenever a dissociation between the actors involved in the regulation and those promoting the conflict occurs. The article suggests that an effective system of dispute regulation in essential public services, especially if based on a pluralist approach, cannot operate in isolation but requires coherent rules in the labour relations system as a whole, namely regarding the collective bargaining procedures and even more the rules of the representation system.