Originally Posted by
CXBA
i forgot to add that: a) the reinstatement was ordered and executed by the branch of judiciary that is handling job-related disputes (giudice del lavoro).It was common until recent that people dismissed by employers could almost always get reinstatement and payment of back salaries for the period between dismissal and the sentence, and b) there was a lot of evidence collected with concealed cameras. Following these occurrences, all the baggages despatch areas were fitted with surveillance cameras, so one of the few areas in which handlers can rummage through luggages without being detected was aircraft holds, until now.
So let's be clear: the individuals concerned were provisionally re-instated until they were found guilty and were dismissed from their jobs afterwards. Thus, contrary to what is being suggested, we are not in the situation where somebody who is convicted of theft is being re-instated in their job.
I can see how different systems might come to different conclusions in the interim period. In the UK, you could not normally obtain re-instatement even provisionally in such a situation (generally speaking, in any event, the UK system tends to be hostile to re-instatement, even when the employer is at fault) but I can see how some other legal systems might give priority to the presumption of innocence until guilt is established even if that would not be my preferred system.