The study compares the mechanisms through which employers in England, Wales and Italy may be legally entitled to unilaterally vary the terms of their employment contracts due to the coronavirus pandemic and developing a taxonomy, through which a meaningful side-by-side comparison of these very different jurisdictions can be constructed. To attain the core purpose of this research, the study relied on the comparative legal research method. Despite the fundamental differences between the employment law regimes of the three countries; the mechanisms through which employers from these jurisdictions can vary the terms of their employment relationships in response to COVID-19 fall into one of these categories, force majeure mechanisms; flexibility mechanisms; hardship mechanisms or mechanisms facilitating bilateral variations tantamount to unilateral variations. The study concluded that there are fundamental differences between the employment law regimes that operate respectively in England and Wales and in Italy. England and Wales is a common law jurisdiction, whereas Italy is a civil law jurisdiction; Italy’s labour market is significantly more tightly regulated than England’s; in England and Wales, the employment contract regulates the employment relationship, whereas in Italy the individual employment.

该研究比较了英格兰、威尔士和意大利的雇主由于冠状病毒大流行而可能合法地有权单方面更改其雇佣合同条款的机制，并开发了一种分类法，通过该分类法对这些非常有意义的并排比较可以构建不同的司法管辖区。为达到本研究的核心目的，本研究采用比较法学研究方法。尽管三个国家的就业法制度存在根本差异；这些司法管辖区的雇主可以根据 COVID-19 改变其雇佣关系条款的机制属于这些类别之一，即不可抗力机制；灵活性机制；困难机制或促进双边变化的机制无异于单边变化。该研究得出的结论是，分别在英格兰和威尔士以及意大利实施的雇佣法制度之间存在根本差异。英格兰和威尔士是普通法管辖区，而意大利是大陆法管辖区；意大利劳动力市场的监管比英国严格得多；在英格兰和威尔士，雇佣合同规范雇佣关系，而在意大利则规范个人雇佣。意大利劳动力市场的监管比英国严格得多；在英格兰和威尔士，雇佣合同规范雇佣关系，而在意大利则规范个人雇佣。意大利劳动力市场的监管比英国严格得多；在英格兰和威尔士，雇佣合同规范雇佣关系，而在意大利则规范个人雇佣。