Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

Genoa court reinstates a Maersk Italia worker whose January 2025 dismissal unions linked to AI replacing customer service tasks

In January 2025 Maersk Italia, the Genoa-based Italian arm of the Danish logistics group, dismissed four employees of its Customer Service department without warning, according to the regional transport unions Filt Cgil, Fit Cisl and Uiltrasporti, who called a one-day strike. The unions said the company had moved the work to Manila and had also replaced part of the tasks done by the Genoa staff with artificial intelligence. One of the four, a woman, sued, while the other three accepted a severance offer. Euronews reported on 30 April 2026 that the Genoa labour court had ordered her reinstatement with compensation for the months she went unpaid, finding the dismissal unlawful because the employer had not tried to redeploy her within the company. A legal commentary in Domani gives the judgment's date as 30 March 2026, while Euronews says the decision came on Thursday, the eve of 1 May. The unions that backed the case described it as the first Italian case in which judges ruled on a dismissal linked to AI, although the Domani commentary also cites a Rome ruling of November 2025 on an AI-related dismissal. The Domani commentary does not name the employer. No source describes the AI system or what it did, and Maersk's account of the dismissals was not found.

AI system
Unidentified customer-service AI tool
Occurred
Jan 2025
Reported
21 January 2025
Event location
Italy
What the AI did
Relation unknown
Reported harm
Professional Harm
Whose AI use
An institution’s AI use
Setting
Work · Justice
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources
8 claims: 8 reported. 5 open questions
People reported harmed
4 people

AI system as recorded: An AI system that, according to the regional unions, took over part of the Customer Service tasks of Maersk Italia's Genoa staff; no source names or describes it

What Happened

The dismissals. Shipping Italy reported on 21 January 2025 the unions' note: 'Four employees of Maersk Italia Spa in the Customer Service department were suddenly dismissed.' (research agent's translation). The note says they were called to a 'performance meeting', handed dismissal letters and told to return their company computers and go home. It says the company 'not only decided to move this work to Manila, in the Philippines, but also replaced part of the tasks done until now by the Genoa staff with the use of Artificial Intelligence'.

The case. Euronews describes the employee as dismissed because she was 'replaced by artificial intelligence', a phrase it quotes without naming its source. It reports that she sued after a dismissal 'motivated by an internal reorganisation plan', and that the other employees accepted a severance offer. The Genoa labour court ordered her reinstatement, holding the dismissal unlawful because it did not respect the employer's duty to look for redeployment before an economic or organisational dismissal. A Domani commentary on a Genoa judgment that matches this case (four workers, an AI reorganisation, failed redeployment) but does not name the employer describes the reorganisation as occasioned by the implementation and development of AI systems and gives the judgment's date as 30 March 2026.

What is not established. No inspected source names the AI system, says which tasks it took over, or gives the company's explanation. The unions' note attributes the job losses to both offshoring and AI, and the share attributable to each is unknown.

Reported harm

Four employees lost their jobs in a reorganisation that their unions said partly replaced their tasks with AI; one went unpaid until a court ordered her reinstatement (union statement and news reports of the ruling).

Outcome

Unknown

The Genoa labour court ordered one employee reinstated with compensation for lost pay, finding the dismissal unlawful for failure to attempt redeployment (reported by Euronews on 30 April 2026; the Domani commentary dates the judgment 30 March 2026). The other three accepted severance. Whether the company appealed is not reported.

What remains unknown

  • Which AI system Maersk Italia adopted and which Customer Service tasks it took over.
  • Maersk's own explanation of the dismissals and its response to the judgment.
  • The exact date of the judgment (30 March 2026 in the Domani commentary; a Thursday shortly before 1 May 2026 in Euronews).
  • Whether the judgment was appealed.
  • How much of the job loss the unions attribute to AI rather than to moving the work to Manila.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. The harm is the employer's dismissal of staff in response to its own adoption of AI. The regional unions said in January 2025 that Maersk Italia replaced part of the Genoa Customer Service tasks with artificial intelligence while moving the work to Manila, Euronews reported that the claimant was dismissed because she had been 'replaced by artificial intelligence', a phrase it quotes without naming who said it, and a legal commentary on a Genoa judgment that matches this case but does not name the employer says the reorganisation behind that dismissal was occasioned by the implementation of AI systems. No source says an AI system produced any output about the dismissed employees, so the relation is unknown under the consequential-response exemption.

8 claims: 8 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported Four Customer Service employees of Maersk Italia, which is based in Genoa, were suddenly dismissed in January 2025, according to the regional transport unions.

Causal attribution. The unions' statement, and a later news report of the ruling. Maersk's account was not found.

  • shippingitaly.it(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'Quattro lavoratori dipendenti della società Maersk Italia Spa del reparto Customer Service sono stati improvvisamente licenziati'; '21 Gennaio 2025'
  • it.euronews.com(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'il reintegro della lavoratrice licenziata insieme ad altri tre colleghi a gennaio 2025'
Reported The unions said Maersk moved the work to Manila and replaced part of the tasks done by the Genoa staff with artificial intelligence.

Causal attribution. The unions' attribution of the dismissals to offshoring and partial AI replacement. The company's explanation was not inspected, and the AI system is not described.

  • shippingitaly.it(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'L’azienda non solo ha deciso di spostare queste lavorazioni a Manila, nelle Filippine, ma ha anche sostituito parte delle mansioni finora svolte dai lavoratori della sede genovese con l’utilizzo dell’Intelligenza Artificiale'
Reported The unions called a one-day strike over the dismissals.

Causal attribution. Reported from the unions' strike proclamation.

Reported One dismissed employee sued, while the other three accepted a severance offer.

Causal attribution. Euronews's account of the case.

  • it.euronews.com(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'aveva deciso di fare causa all'azienda in seguito al licenziamento motivato da un piano di riorganizzazione interna. Gli altri dipendenti, invece, accettarono la buonuscita economica proposta loro come risarcimento'
Reported The Genoa labour court ordered the employee reinstated, finding the dismissal unlawful because the employer had not tried to redeploy her elsewhere in the company before dismissing her.

Causal attribution. Reports of the judgment. The judgment text was not inspected, the Domani commentary does not name the employer, and the two reports may share an underlying account, so the claim is kept as reported.

  • it.euronews.com(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'la sentenza del Tribunale del lavoro di Genova ha disposto giovedì il reintegro della lavoratrice'; 'si tratta di un "licenziamento illegittimo" in quanto "non rispetta l'obbligo di repêchage"'
  • editorialedomani.it(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'il licenziamento era dichiarato illegittimo, per il mancato tentativo di ricollocazione (repêchage) del lavoratore'
Reported According to a legal commentary on a Genoa judgment that matches this case but does not name the employer, the dismissal arose from a company reorganisation occasioned by the implementation and development of AI systems, which involved four workers.

Causal attribution. A commentator's summary of the judgment's facts. It describes the reorganisation as occasioned by AI systems and does not describe what any AI system did.

  • editorialedomani.it(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'la scelta di licenziare il lavoratore scaturiva da una riorganizzazione aziendale occasionata dall’implementazione ed evoluzione dei sistemi di intelligenza artificiale, che coinvolgeva quattro lavoratori'
Reported The judgment entitles the employee to compensation for the months she went without pay.

Causal attribution. Euronews's account of the judgment.

  • it.euronews.com(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'La sentenza reintegra la lavoratrice con il diritto a essere risarcita per i mesi in cui è rimasta scoperta dallo stipendio'
Reported Euronews reported that the employee was dismissed in January 2025, together with three colleagues, because she had been 'replaced by artificial intelligence', a phrase it puts in quotation marks without naming who said it, and that the dismissal was motivated by an internal reorganisation plan.

Causal attribution. Euronews's description of the reason for the dismissal. The quoted phrase is not attributed to the court, the unions or the company, and the judgment was not inspected.

  • it.euronews.com(opens in new tab) supports · Italian
    'il reintegro della lavoratrice licenziata insieme ad altri tre colleghi a gennaio 2025 perché "sostituita dall'Intelligenza artificiale"'; 'in seguito al licenziamento motivato da un piano di riorganizzazione interna'

Sources

3 sources inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in Italian in full. Quotations and their English renderings in this record were translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed them. The article reproduces the regional unions' strike-proclamation note of January 2025. Applies to s1.

Read in Italian in full. Quotations and their English renderings in this record were translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed them. The live euronews.com page refused the fetcher (HTTP 406); the identical article was read in a Wayback Machine capture of the same URL. Applies to s2.

Read in Italian in full. Quotations and their English renderings in this record were translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed them. A legal commentary column dated 8 May 2026, mainly about a Chinese ruling, with a paragraph on a Genoa judgment that matches this case (Genoa labour court, four workers, AI reorganisation, failed redeployment) but does not name the employer; the judgment itself was not inspected. Applies to s3.

Event countries: Italy. Affected-person countries: Italy. Court countries: Italy.

The dismissed staff worked at Maersk Italia's office in Genoa, which the unions' note and Euronews both locate there, and the ruling was given by the Genoa labour court.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-11: Published as a concrete dismissal of four Customer Service employees that their unions attributed partly to AI replacement, followed by a first-instance court ruling reinstating one of them. The AI attribution is the unions' and a commentator's, and the record states that no source describes the AI system.

People described

Four Customer Service employees at a logistics company's office in Genoa, one of whom sued

People reported harmed in this case

4 people

0 AI participants · 4 other people harmed

Four employees dismissed: the unions' note names four Customer Service employees, and Euronews says the claimant was dismissed together with three colleagues. Counted under other people harmed because the AI was the employer's tool. The count does not establish that AI caused each dismissal.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#dismissal#workplace-ai#logistics#labour-court#reinstatement#italy#consequential-response

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Genoa court reinstates a Maersk Italia worker whose January 2025 dismissal unions linked to AI replacing customer service tasks. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2025-genoa-labour-court-reinstates-logistics-worker-dismissed-in-reported-ai-replacement

BibTeX

@misc{2025_genoa_labour_court_reinstates_logistics_worker_dismissed_in_reported_ai_replacement,
  title = {Genoa court reinstates a Maersk Italia worker whose January 2025 dismissal unions linked to AI replacing customer service tasks},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2025-genoa-labour-court-reinstates-logistics-worker-dismissed-in-reported-ai-replacement}
}

Related cases

High Unidentified image tool

Jeju: police refer a middle-school student over secretly filming teachers and making sexual deepfake composites; teachers dispute victim count and legal aid

Jeju Dongbu police announced on 23 September 2026 that a student at a middle school on Jeju had been referred to prosecutors without detention on 17 September for violating the Sexual Violence Punishment Act (filming with a camera or similar device). The student's phone was voluntarily submitted by his guardians and forensically examined; the examination found footage relating to some teachers and some sexual composites, and the student admitted the conduct. News1 reported that the student was booked for filming a teacher's body with his phone during a school field trip around mid-July 2026, that the offending had continued for several months with multiple victims, and that police found no indication the composites had been distributed. Police told Seoul Shinmun there were more victim teachers than the one first reported but withheld the number to avoid secondary harm, and that no student at the school was a victim; the Jeju teachers' union questioned whether the full scope of harm had been established. According to the union, two months on the victim teachers were receiving hospital treatment and counselling while teaching daily, gave police statements on 14 September without a lawyer, attended the regional teachers' rights protection committee on 17 September without institutional support, wrote the criminal complaint themselves, and were offered 3.3 million won in legal fees for all of them together, payable after the case ends; two requests to meet the superintendent were not accepted. On 29 September one of the victim teachers gave a press interview at the Jeju Teachers' Union office. She said that early in the investigation she had seen on the student's phone material showing other teachers and current students, had made a list of the people and types of harm, and that the material shown to her at the police victim examination was considerably less than what she had seen; Yonhap-chain outlets quote her as saying the students she recognised numbered 10 to 20 and that a graduate had suffered worse deepfakes. She said investigators asked the school only to identify the perpetrator and never requested material to identify the students in the footage, and that the school sent parents a letter premised on there being no student victims. Police replied that phone forensics had been thorough, that every act beyond social norms had been identified and proven, and that one student victim had been confirmed, a student at a different school. The teachers were notified on 22 September that the case had gone to the prosecution and on 24 September that it had been sent to the court's juvenile division as a juvenile protection case, before they had submitted further evidence and a victim opinion. The teacher said the original complaint had also asked police to examine whether physical contact in 2025 was forcible molestation and whether repeated approaching and waiting in 2026 was stalking, and Halla Ilbo reports that such conduct is said to date from 2025. Yonhap-chain reports describe the charged victims as five teachers. The same day the education office briefed on legal-aid rules (up to 6.6 million won per instance when a teacher is sued, 3.3 million won per case when a teacher files a complaint; office lawyers cannot act as a teacher's private counsel), said it had linked the teachers to the national Digital Sexual Crime Victim Support Center, announced an integrated support system through a hotline, and its section head said the office was sorry that early support had not been felt. The KTU Jeju branch (28 September) and the Jeju Teachers' Union (14 and 29 September) demand a victim-support system, per-teacher legal fees paid in advance and a dedicated support team. On 6 October 2026 Seogwipo Broadcasting reported, citing people in education and a tipster, that the education authority had finally rejected the victim teachers' application for lawyer fees for an additional criminal complaint, saying in a written opinion that with a police investigation already under way a further complaint could hardly stop or prevent the infringement of their teaching, so the support requirements were not met; critics contrast this with full legal-cost support in earlier sexual-offence cases.

Medium DIGI editorial tool

Créteil, France: a court suspended Gisi's (Infopro Digital) plan to cut eight sub-editor posts in favour of a generative-AI tool, finding a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff

Gisi, the Infopro Digital subsidiary publishing L'Usine nouvelle, LSA and L'Argus de l'assurance (127 staff, 92 journalists), presented to its works council (CSE) on 4 May 2026 a reorganisation built around 'DIGI', an in-house generative-AI editorial tool, and on 12 May 2026 opened consultation on the reorganisation and on the resulting collective dismissal of its eight secrétaires de rédaction (sub-editors), to be replaced by two chefs d'édition, on the company's estimate that the tool would take over about 70% of sub-editor tasks. Some 250 journalists across Infopro Digital's 26 titles had struck in spring 2026 against a group-wide plan to cut 19 sub-editor posts, and according to Digital Watch (citing Stratégies) five of the eight Gisi sub-editors had received pre-dismissal interview letters. The CSE, relying on an expert report, went to the Créteil judicial court in July. On 15 September 2026 the référé judge found that deploying the plan without real-situation testing presented 'un risque grave et caractérisé sur la santé physique et mentale de plusieurs catégories de salariés', ordered the suspension of the reorganisation and the collective dismissal (including the redeployment processes) until real-situation tests and full pilot issues are produced, with a provisional penalty of 8,000 euros per day for three months, and refused the damages provision. Gisi said it would continue the tests and reserved the right to appeal.

High Unidentified AI tool

SDT strikes solicitor Abhishek Kumar off the Register of Foreign Lawyers after AI-generated false citations in his SRA defence

On 25 August 2026 the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal struck Abhishek Kumar off the Register of Foreign Lawyers after finding proved that his 12 March 2026 Answer to the SRA's Rule 12 Statement contained misleading quotations and citations produced with generative AI — including a non-existent 'SRA v Chan [2020] EWHC 1502' and a miscited 'SRA v James, MacGregor & Naylor [2018] EWCA Civ 1420' that is actually an intellectual-property case — and that his 9 April 2026 email admitting AI use was itself AI-drafted with further errors. The tribunal said it would have struck him off on that allegation alone; the parallel ground was his January 2024 conviction under s.21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. This is the SDT's first case on a lawyer's use of AI, per the SRA's counsel.

Medium Unidentified voice-cloning tool

Italy: Fideuram chairman Paolo Molesini is deceived by a WhatsApp impersonation of Intesa Sanpaolo's CEO and a phone call in the reportedly AI-cloned voice of a lawyer he knew into ordering about 95 million euros of transfers; at least 36 million remain missing and he resigned on 12 March 2026, weeks later

On 23 February 2026 Paolo Molesini, then chairman of Fideuram (the private-banking subsidiary of Intesa Sanpaolo), received a WhatsApp message from an unknown number from someone claiming to be Intesa's chief executive Carlo Messina, announcing a confidential acquisition that had to be executed through Fideuram. The same day a caller presenting as a lawyer of A&O Shearman whom Molesini knew, whose voice ANSA, Il Fatto Quotidiano and Corriere della Sera, reporting from the Milan court papers, describe as created with artificial intelligence (today.it, which also cites the seizure decree, writes that the court papers do not yet answer whether the voice was imitated), had him sign a confidentiality agreement and sent eleven payment instructions; Fideuram's treasury head was separately contacted by someone posing as Fideuram's CEO. Between 23 and 25 February eleven transfers totalling about 95 million euros went to accounts in Portugal and at Bank of China; the bank's alarm systems and the Milan prosecutors recovered about 40-42 million from China and 13 million seized in Portugal, leaving at least 36 million (39.5 million per the court papers) missing after conversion into cryptocurrency. Molesini, who Corriere writes is not under investigation, resigned as chairman on 12 March 2026, which Fideuram announced as being for personal reasons; a 48-year-old Israeli citizen is under investigation as a member of the gang.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents