must be stable and, therefore, somehow known and accepted by both parties to the employment relationship. Moreover, it is to be taken into account that, during a vacation in more than one place, the place where the work is carried out may change several times, always without the company being aware of it and the applicable law cannot certainly change on a daily basis, besides the non - existing connection with the State where the worker has his or her habitual residence, other than the connection consisting of his or her vacationing choices. Although a large quantity of material (mostly anonymous) published on various websites argues the contrary, “workation” has no implication whatsoever on the operation of Regulation (EU) No. 593 / 2008, Article 8(2), by its very nature (and rightly so) intended to consider permanent situations only. Perhaps, there is some confusion between two concepts that are not akin, i. e. work carried out during vacations and the identification of work permanently carried out remotely31, with the consent of the employer and of the employee, who wants to choose a place of residence other than the place where the company is based, in geographical areas that the employee deems preferable. In this regard, Regulation (EU) No. 593 / 2008, at Article 8(2), poses problems that are significant but do not concern tourism, because the change of place where the worker carries out his or her job cannot be considered as such, if it is the result of a decision having permanent effects. The inhabitants of seaside, Mediterranean, Atlantic or exotic locations can be deemed lucky, but the remote work they carry out from their residence is not “workation”. V. “WORKATION” AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION The rationale behind the identification of the court having competent jurisdiction is similar, as, under Regulation (EU) No. 1215 / 2012, at Article 21(1)(b), first sentence, the employer may be sued “in the courts for the place where or from where the employee habitually carries out his work or in the courts for the last place where he did so”, and the adverb “habitually” rules out any relevance of “workation”, precisely because this requirement is not met by work carried out during vacations. Not by chance, when discussing about flying personnel32, relevance was attached not simply to the airport of departure of 31 In Italy, the term would be “in modalità agile” (smart working), pursuant to Italian law no. 81 / 2017. 32 See European Court of Justice, Second Chamber, 14 September 2017, Case no. 168/2016 and Case no. 107 “WORKATION” AND THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==