We do not play around with labor law. If the Medef seems to have forgotten it during a dispute, the Paris industrial tribunal has just reminded it of its obligations. On April 13, the employers’ organization was ordered to pay a little more than 65,000 euros to a former employee, including 10,000 euros for “Brutal and vexatious dismissal”, as indicated in the judgment, revealed by The chained Duck from Wednesday 2 June and The world procured.
Pierre-Yves Lavallade was hired in September 2016 by Medef as director of the professional federations pole. A year later, he became chief of staff “Within the presidency” of the employers’ movement, then led by Pierre Gattaz. In July 2018, the latter gave up his chair to Geoffroy Roux de Bézieux.
Then begins “the”descent into hell ”for [M.] Lavallade » : “He finds himself isolated, excluded from making important decisions, to such an extent that he is no longer able to perform his duties”, according to the pleadings of his lawyer, summarized in the judgment. On August 31, 2018, he was summoned to an interview prior to dismissal, scheduled for September 12. But he warns that he will not be able to go there, being on sick leave at this date “For significant anxiety state”. Shortly thereafter, a registered letter from the employers’ organization followed in which she notified him of the termination of her employment contract. ” serious misconduct “. A procedure justified by the fact that the chief of staff has “Voluntarily and abruptly ceased to carry out its missions”, according to the arguments of Medef’s lawyer, developed at the hearing.
“No evidence” for the judges
The judges considered that these “Reproaches” were not supported by “No evidence” : therefore, there is no ” serious misconduct “ ni “Real and serious cause” to this separation. They also considered that it was necessary to compensate the specific damage, linked to “Circumstances” of the rupture: Mr. Lavallade was flanked at the door while he was on sick leave and although his work received the “Congratulations” by M. Gattaz. In addition, the name of his successor had been announced “Publicly and very widely the same day of the pronouncement of his dismissal “ while “He himself was not informed”, reports the industrial tribunal, in its judgment.
You have 34.92% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.