Nature to regain its rights has nothing surprisingHowever the trade figures are misleadingVision however firmly rejected by the InseeThe meeting of the White House with George wCompared to the Kansai Kanto seems to fade4 billion funded by public and private funds5 at year end off events in the last quarter to imagine and develop tomorrow's productsJust as had told him to take that of Caisses d'EpargneIt is an application of the teachings of StThe Court of cassation issued on 13 December (Cass. Soc.,. 13 Dec 2006, no. 04 - 40 527) a rather disturbing case, which asks whether it should be, or not, take it for a turnaround.
An ambulance is in disagreement with his employer concerning the calculation of hours worked and, dissatisfied with the registered amount on his payroll newsletter, resigned citing the wrongs of the employer for "non-payment of wages and related elements.
The Court of appeal of Nīmes considered that because of breaches of the employer, the breach of the contract of employment must produce the effects of a dismissal without real and serious cause. The employer rebelled: is that a disagreement on the calculation of the time of actual work, on the basis of a complex regulation. Step what whip a cat, seems say, or at least step what take Act of the breach of the contract of employment if little.
Unlike his pending, the Court of cassation gives reason nīmois judge. She first takes its motto concerning the making of Act:
"But whereas the resignation of any facts alleged to the employer analysis in decision-making Act which produce effects or dismissal without real and serious cause if the facts alleged justified, or otherwise, of a resignation."
Imaginary grievances
Until then, nothing new: it is the position of principle adopted by the High Court on 25 June 2003 and which now governs the so-called acts of "autolicenciement": the judge must analyze the facts for the taking of action, and from this analysis, classify the rupture in the "dismissal" box or in the box "resignation".
But it is subsequently raises question: Noting that the grievances raised by the employee were "established", without wanting to, as the request of the enterprise, consider their importance, the Court of cassation condemns it.
In a letter in which an employee pours its grievances on his employer concluded in breach of the contract of employment, it is clear that the first judge's mission is to ensure that the complaints in question are not imaginary. Include, for example, the history of this commercial who, suspecting his employer of overcharging the goods and to defraud VAT, had informed it that, without guarantees on the regularity of the transactions he realized, it would consider in unable to continue its collaboration with the company. Unsurprisingly, the Court of cassation held that the facts relied upon "were not established" and had concluded the resignation (Cass. Soc., June 25, 2003).
The Court, however, considered that the judge should not stick to check the reality of the facts, he was then required to assess whether their degree of severity warranted the decision taken by the employee. Thus it held without indulgence a Recordon attaché who had taken note of the termination of his contract due to a shift of a day or two in the payment of his salary, this slight delay, undisputed, explaining the presence of holidays in the period considered (Cass. Soc.,. 19 Jan 2005).
A venial sin
This case was certainly not escaped the employer of our ambulance: the similarity of the acts is striking, in both cases, it is a breach of employer wage, which seems a negotiation or, at the extreme, an action for payment of salary could give satisfaction to the employee. With this decision, the employer insists on the venial sin his character; Nevertheless, the axe falls!
Taken of doubt, before shouting in the turnaround, the reader of the judgment wondered if this severity is not justified by the circumstances: who knows, the sin of the employer was perhaps not as venial that he was willing to say. But then why is the decision published in the bulletin of the Court of cassation It is true that the issue decided in the case are three, but the other two points are not quite revolutionary to explain the publication. Impossible, therefore, to exclude the hypothesis of a turnaround. This would therefore mean that the slightest error in the calculation of the salary could lead to a breach of contract the employer wrongs... It refuses to believe...
