Tavola disegno 1 copia

Note issued by AlmavivA Group on Atesia

Note issued by AlmavivA Group on Atesia

20-10-2006

The succession of news items has determined the need to clarify the Group’s current position and the measures it intends to undertake.

10/20/2006

Note issued by AlmavivA Group on Atesia

The succession of (often contradictory) news items, rumors and speculation concerning recent developments in the employment status of our personnel has determined the need to clarify the Group’s current position and the measures it intends to undertake.

 
First of all, we intend to re-iterate – once again – our firm and grounded conviction that we have always operated in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations and the agreements entered into, on a number of occasions, with the trade union organizations. Moreover, no observer acting in good faith can fail to deny that the AlmavivA Group is the only call and contact centre operator that has hired about 4,000 workers on a permanent basis in the last few years, and at Atesia, in particular, the implementation of the stabilization plan, under the agreements concluded with the unions, has resulted in an increase in the number of permanent employees from 90 to about 400. This stabilization plan, however, which would have led to the hiring of over 2,000 persons under permanent employment contracts, has been suddenly interrupted following the observations made by the Labor Inspectorate, in its reports of 21 and 25 August last, contesting our work organization and even the trade union agreements.
 
We believe that the observations set out in the reports are legally groundless and feature obvious formal shortcomings. And we believe that certain – fortunately isolated – press campaigns against Atesia, and AlmavivA Group as a whole, are biased and unfair and have already created a great deal of damage to our business and to operations in general, which damage could further increase in the future.
 
In the last few weeks, we have been following, with great attention and interest, the efforts that the institutions and social partners are making to clarify the rules governing this industry, which has unquestionably suffered more than others from certain problems of interpretation of the applicable laws, and the effects of this on procurement processes, the focus now being on the tender offering the lowest price. The circular letter issued by the Ministry of Labor, the budget bill and, lastly, the Common Notice signed by the social partners on 4 October last, tend to assert a fundamental “certainty of law” comprising clear rules, which are equal for all and which, we believe, can only be beneficial for the workers employed in the industry. The AlmavivA Group has nothing to fear from a competitive environment, based not on the rates practised but on the quality of the service delivered and, as soon as the state budget is approved, we intend to immediately implement the stabilization program concerning thousands of workers.
 
However, there is a concrete risk that the Atesia workforce may be barred from reaping the benefits of this process. We admit this with regret, but we have a duty to be frank, also because we fear that the abovementioned press campaigns may have created excessively high expectations or, even, may have convinced some people that the agreements and the regulations conceal conditions of favor for Atesia.
 
In its report, the Labor Inspectorate requests Atesia to “stabilize” all its workforce, regardless of the job activities and the individual employment contracts. Such a demand, in our opinion, contrasts with the provisions issued by the Ministry of Labor in its circular letter no. 17 of June last, which makes a distinction between inbound operations – which require that the workers concerned be employed on a permanent basis – and outbound operations – for which, on the contrary, non-permanent employees can be engaged. But the intolerable aspect of all this, in our opinion, is that our Group seems to be the only recipient of such demands, which do not seem to concern the other seven hundred Italian companies operating in the industry, our competitors, which, as we all know, also employ freelance project workers, just like Atesia, for providing their outbound services, and all feature the same employment arrangements disapproved of, in our case, by the Labor Inspectors. The Institutions should establish clear rules and make sure that they apply to all, and we too will abide by them; otherwise, we cannot accept any discriminatory behavior targeting Atesia, the only result of which would be its disappearance from the market.
 
Therefore, if Atesia receives equal treatment compared to its competitors, the company will be able to support the “stabilization” processes introduced by the new regulations. Otherwise, we regret to say it, but we will be obliged to “freeze” the present situation until the competent courts issue a final decision on the matter.