Which authorities have submitted the complaint about harassment to CSR?

The interpellation to the Council of State was presented by deputies Tamara Merlo and Maura Mossi Nembrini, representatives of Più Donne, following the conclusion of the investigations into a new case that emerged in 2026.

What is the State Council's position on the measures taken by CSR?

In its answer to question number 103.26, the Council of State argued that CSR adopted almost all of the recommendations made after 2020, registering a progressive consolidation of trust in protection instruments.

Why do MEPs call for independent verification?

The deputies question the fact that the Government does not provide objective data or lists of recommendations that have remained unpublished, stressing that the mere ability to react to a report does not demonstrate the preventive effectiveness of the measures introduced.

CSR and harassment at work: the debate on prevention (cross-border guide)

Di Redazione Frontaliere Ticino · Published on 18 August 2026

View of Canton Ticino with institutional buildings

MEPs Tamara Merlo and Maura Mossi Nembrini are calling for independent verifications after a new case emerged in 2026.

Context

In a nutshell

Interview presented by Tamara Merlo and Maura Mossi Nembrini.
Request for independent verification of CSR measures since 2020.
Decision of the State Council not to promote verification.

What: Interrogation on anti-harassment measures
When: Year 2026
Where: Canton of Ticino and CSR
Who: Deputies Tamara Merlo and Maura Mossi Nembrini
Amount: Not yet specified

The issue of the prevention and management of harassment at work returns to the centre of the institutional debate in the Canton of Ticino. After the interventions announced by CSR and SRH in 2020 to strengthen the prevention, reporting and management of harassment and behaviour detrimental to personal integrity, a new case issued in 2026 calls into question the effectiveness of the measures introduced. The situation prompted MPs Tamara Merlo and Maura Mossi Nembrini, members of Più Donne, to present an appeal to the Government. The political initiative comes after the conclusion of the investigations into the new case and the decision of the Council of State not to promote an independent verification. MEPs stress that Parliament must be able to verify whether these measures have actually produced the declared results. The regulatory and organisational context directly involves employees and collaborators working in the public broadcasting sector, raising questions about transparency and effective integrity protection

Operational details

The interpellation raises specific questions about the role and scope of the Canton in the supervision of public radio and television entities. The Government claims to follow the evolution of the situation through its representatives within the SSR.CORSI. At the same time, the executive specifies that they do not receive direct internal reports from CSR. Consequently, MEPs Merlo and Mossi Nembrini ask what concrete information is actually available to the Council of State and on what basis it believes it can reassure Parliament about the effectiveness of the measures adopted. The parliamentarians emphasize the need to use the existing institutional channels at the SSR.CORSI to urge independent verification. The text of the interpellation highlights a fundamental principle for the protection of workers: if the Government considers that the measures adopted are effective, it must be able to indicate on what objective elements it bases this assessment. In the event that these elements are not available, the executive should explain why it still considers an independent verification of the state of safety and personal integrity in the workplaces of public radio and television unnecessary.

The issue raised in Ticino directly calls into question the evaluation parameters adopted by companies and public or public service institutions when it comes to preventing harmful behaviour

Recommended tools

For an updated estimate, use the net salary calculator and the CHF-EUR exchange comparator.

Key points

The way in which companies handle reports of harassment and protect the personal integrity of employees is a crucial element for work well-being in the Ticino context. Those who work in the Canton of Ticino, both as a resident and as a border worker, must be able to rely on high safety standards and transparent procedures. To learn more about the economic situation, wages and working conditions in the cantonal territory, you can consult the analysis and planning tools available online.

Control procedures and tools

The internal procedures of companies subject to Swiss law provide for specific obligations to protect employees. When critical issues arise, organizations are called upon to react promptly, but the ongoing political debate highlights that immediate reaction must be accompanied by a structured and verifiable prevention by third-party or independent bodies. For those who want to check their professional situation and compare data relating to their employment or salary in Ticino, the calcolatore offers a detailed and up-to-date overview of the salary and tax parameters applied in the cantonal labour market.

Source: ticinonews.ch

Frequently Asked Questions

Which authorities have submitted the complaint about harassment to CSR?: The interpellation to the Council of State was presented by deputies Tamara Merlo and Maura Mossi Nembrini, representatives of Più Donne, following the conclusion of the investigations into a new case that emerged in 2026.
What is the State Council's position on the measures taken by CSR?: In its answer to question number 103.26, the Council of State argued that CSR adopted almost all of the recommendations made after 2020, registering a progressive consolidation of trust in protection instruments.
Why do MEPs call for independent verification?: The deputies question the fact that the Government does not provide objective data or lists of recommendations that have remained unpublished, stressing that the mere ability to react to a report does not demonstrate the preventive effectiveness of the measures introduced.