(en) France, Alternative Libertaire AL #245 - Fronts rights:
"The labor ready" by Jean-luc Dupriez, Union defender (CGT) (fr, it,
pt) [machine translation]
At the age of 23 years, Lucie[1] was hired as secretary accountant by a boss owns two
separate companies specialized in landscaping. It is made to work in a room in the main
house of the employer, fitted summarily. Although it has a single employment contract with
one of the two companies, the employer made him do secretarial and accounting for both
companies. Working conditions are difficult. The employer is aggressive vis-?-vis its
employee-es. But Lucie takes two years. At this time, in full balance sheet date, the
employer assaulted verbally. At the end of the day, Lucy goes to his doctor instead off
work. She did not work again for that employer. While so far, nothing has been criticized,
it will be dismissed for gross misconduct, supposedly based on an impressive list of
complaints, mostly about the company with which Lucia has not signed a labor contract.
Until 2011, the "workforce ready," that is to say, the provision of employee to another
company - apart from subcontracting, temporary, intermediary companies and employer groups
- was liable to be accused of "labor trafficking," which can lead to criminal convictions
and compensation for damage suffered by the employee-es.
The law of 28 July 2011 created the "Loan nonprofit labor" for which "the lending company
bills the user undertaking for the provision, that the wages paid to the employee ,
related payroll taxes and professional fees paid to the person concerned under the
provision ". However, this loan is to be formalized by a provision of an agreement between
the lending company and the client company and an amendment to the employment contract.
Obviously in the case of Lucia, nothing has been done!
Lucia, following his dismissal, filed a case with the tribunal. Faced with the avalanche
of grievances, all more imaginary than each other, but against whom it is not always easy
to defend, defender relied on violations by the employer of the provisions governing the
loan workforce.
The Labour Court, whose judgment has been rendered, could only note that the employer "did
not comply with loan terms of labor, non-profit" and that it "can not criticize[Lucie] any
fault whatsoever concerning the tasks performed on behalf" of the other company.
The employer has been ordered to pay six months' salary under the compensation for
dismissal without just cause, two months to pay in lieu of notice, severance pay and the
payment of the layoff as a precaution.
[1] The first names and places are changed, the rest is genuine.
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Droits-Devants-Le-pret-de-main-d
