Referendum 8-9 June: question 4, the debate on workplace safety

The question asks for the repeal of the rule that excludes the joint liability of the client (i.e. the person who entrusts a job to a contract), the contractor (the person who is assigned to do the job) and the subcontractor (the person who, in some cases, carries out the work on behalf of the contractor) for accidents at work related to the type of activity carried out by the contracting or subcontracting companies. In technical terms, we speak of "accidents resulting from risks specific to the business activity". The expression "joint liability" indicates that all the parties involved (in this case the client, the contractor and the subcontractor) have the same obligations, for example of compensation, towards those who suffer damage for which they are responsible. Currently, joint liability in contracts is not provided for. However, if the yes vote were to win, in the event of an accident to a worker, the client would also have to answer for it. This obviously has repercussions especially in sectors such as construction.