Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-9 of 9

Disciplinary action is limited by the terms of internal regulations

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
June 3 2011

In a recent case (Cass Soc 26102010, n 09-42.740) the Cour de Cassation held that a company can apply only disciplinary measures that are expressly provided for in its internal regulations

Bullying does not need to be long term to constitute harassment

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
August 12 2010

The Labour Code and previous court decisions highlighted the fact that the actions considered as bullying must be repeated in order to constitute harassment, and it was on this basis that the Court of Appeal in the present case held that while the employee was demoted and sidelined following a long term sick leave, and threatened and insulted after a second period returning to work, these events took place over a relatively short period (of approximately one month), insufficient, bearing in mind the period of sick leave, to characterise harassment through bullying

Employees made redundant must be informed of the grounds for redundancy at the latest by the date they accept the CRP

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
August 12 2010

The State-run CRP (convention de reclassement personnalisée) redeployment programme must be proposed to employees at risk of redundancy in particular in businesses of less than 1,000 employees, either during their preliminary meeting, or in procedures where no preliminary meeting is required, following on from the final employee representative meeting

Law on conditions for the redeployment of employees at risk of redundancy

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
August 12 2010

French case law has defined a principle whereby if considering terminating employees on economic grounds, the employer must search for and propose to employees any appropriate redeployment opportunities within the company and the group to which the company belongs

The employer's redeployment obligations in the event of redundancy cannot be limited by employees' refusal in principle before any concrete proposal is made

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
June 15 2009

In the event of redundancies on economic grounds, the employer has an obligation to propose any available positions within the company and even the group for redeployment. Consistent case law requires any available positions abroad to also be offered

An employee cannot be dismissed for false accusations of harassment and bullying, unless it can be shown that the claims were made in bad faith

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
June 15 2009

The Cour de Cassation has confirmed the full force of anti-retaliation rules under French law which apply to victims of harassment, holding that an employee who brought a false claim against their employer for bullying and harassment cannot be disciplined, dismissed, or suffer discriminatory measures, in particular in terms of compensation, training, redeployment, promotion or renewal of their employment contract, for having claimed to have suffered harassment, despite the fact that the claims made could not be substantiated

Failure to follow procedural timing requirements will result in authorisation being refused for the termination of protected employees

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
June 15 2009

In order for the employer to dismiss a protected employee (i.e. an employee representative or similar), authorisation must be obtained from the Labour Administration

Bonuses and variable compensation must be based on objective criteria

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
June 15 2009

In a previous case (Cass. Soc. 27 March 2009), it was held that a collective variable compensation plan cannot provide for total discretion from the employer in terms of the payment of bonuses, requiring such bonuses to be based on rules that are defined in advance and can be monitored

The right to days off in lieu continues during notice period even when not worked

Bird & Bird
-
France
-
June 15 2009

The Cour de Cassation has gone further than previous cases which have held that employees are entitled to the same salary during their notice period paid in lieu as they would have been if they had worked, holding that RTT days off in lieu granted for hours normally worked between 35 and 39 hours per week should continue to be paid even if the employee does not work the notice period