National Institute of Labour: GPS is not a working tool for security services, not even if it is a ministerial decree that requires the geolocation of personnel.

The geolocation system (GPS) installed on the equipment of sworn security guards – although provided for, for certain organisational structures, by Annex A of Ministerial Decree no. 269 of 1 December 2010 – does not integrate, according to the orientation of the National Labour Inspectorate, a "work tool" in the technical-legal sense, with the consequences that derive from it in terms of labour law (Article 4, Law of 20 May 1970,  no. 300) and, as a consequence, on the data protection plan.

The distinction is - in fact - decisive:

- if the device is strictly functional to the performance of the work, the use falls within the scope of work tools and does not require – as such – the activation of the guarantee procedure referred to in art. 4, paragraph 1, of the Workers' Statute;

- if, on the other hand, the device is not necessary for the performance and, as configured, allows the monitoring (even continuous) of the worker's position, it assumes the nature of a plant/system suitable for remote control, with the consequent full application of art. 4, paragraph 1.

This is precisely the conclusion reiterated by the INL: the installation of GPS on the radio equipment of private security guards cannot be qualified as a necessary tool for work performance and, therefore, falls within the discipline of art. 4, paragraph 1.

The INL Note (prot. DIL NORD no. 462 of 02/02/2026, subject: "Application of art. 4 of Law 300/1970 for security guards. Feedback") is based on the assumption, often evoked by operators: Ministerial Decree no. 269/2010, in Annex A, point 4.1.7, requires – for institutes operating in the extended territorial area (areas 3, 4 and 5) – a radio communications system with planimetric/geo-referencing support, also providing for an organizational alternative (operations centers/detached communication centers).

However, the INL clarifies two decisive profiles: the first, Ministerial Decree no. 269/2010 is a source of lower rank than Law no. 300/1970; the second, the provision of geo-referencing is limited to certain areas and is accompanied by alternative methods.

Hence the assumption: the purpose of safety/organization and the regulatory provision itself do not automatically determine the assimilation of GPS as a work tool nor do they eliminate the guarantees of the Statute.

Consequently, the adoption of these systems requires the activation of the procedure referred to in art. 4, paragraph 1, Law no. 300/1970, and therefore – alternatively – the trade union agreement, or the authorization of the competent Inspectorate.

In summary, the installation of GPS on the equipment of security guards, if carried out in the absence of a trade union agreement or authorization from the competent INL/ITL, exposes the company to the risk of dispute and sanction, since it configures a system suitable for remote control not assisted by the procedural guarantees provided for by art. 4 Statute.