A 62-year-old employee saw his professional career abruptly interrupted after failing an assessment carried out by a “mystery shopper” in a supermarket in Siena, Italy. The episode, which occurred during an apparently normal shift, ended up having profound consequences on his work and personal life, raising questions about the limits of assessments carried out without the workers’ knowledge.
With more than a decade of service at the company, the worker was surprised by a test that, according to him, did not correspond to his usual tasks. The situation gained greater relevance because it involved a union delegate, a circumstance that led to the case being analyzed with particular attention by union structures and public opinion.
According to , a website specializing in economics and current affairs, the evaluation took place on October 27th. A common method was used in large supermarkets: people hired to simulate shopping hid small products in the middle of beer boxes placed in the cart.
During cashier service, the employee did not notice the presence of hidden items. Shortly afterwards, he was informed that the failure was considered serious and that he was no longer part of the company’s staff, without being presented with any alternative solution or possibility of correction.
The worker remembers that he had already undergone a similar assessment months before, without any problems. This time, it ensures that the objects have been placed almost imperceptibly, making detection extremely difficult.
The consequences went beyond the professional scope. Since his dismissal, he has been at home and admits that the situation has had a strong psychological and financial impact on the family, especially considering that his wife suffers from a disability. A decision made in minutes ended up profoundly changing his daily stability.
Union denounces lack of criteria and transparency
Filcams CGIL, the union that monitors the process, harshly criticized the way the company applies the secret shopping system. According to the union organization, there are no clear standards or previously defined criteria that frame these assessments.
Furthermore, the union also points out that it is the administration who decides, unilaterally, when and who is evaluated, without any prior communication or internal framework. In his view, this mechanism has been used to remove workers with older contracts, considered more onerous for the company.
According to the union secretary, there is no regulation that establishes the disciplinary weight of these failures or indicates the possible consequences. A meeting has already been scheduled with the board with the aim of obtaining clarification and trying to reverse the decision.
If there is no favorable solution, the union admits to taking more forceful protest actions, such as occupations of establishments or even a strike on a regional scale. The climate between workers and management remains tense.
The supermarket chain was questioned about the case, but chose not to comment.
Could a situation like this occur in Portugal?
The episode in Siena raises a pertinent question: would a similar dismissal be possible in Portugal? According to the same source, the use of mystery shoppers is not prohibited by Portuguese labor legislation. However, its application requires well-defined internal rules and disciplinary processes that strictly comply with the Labor Code.
When the worker in question performs union functions, legal protection is even greater, significantly limiting the companies’ scope for action.
In the absence of transparency, objective criteria and clear procedures, this type of assessment can conflict with workers’ fundamental rights, making its use legally questionable.
Also read:
