In this case: Viveo’s trade unions consider that, at the time of the takeover, Viveo France was a healthy company and that the redundancy plan was not justified on economic grounds. At first instance, the unions’ request to cancel the redundancy plan (also known as PSE) was rejected. In May 2011, the Paris Court of Appeal ruled in their favor. In a ruling handed down on May 3, the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) sought to dry up litigation concerning the nullity of employment protection plans. In the case of Leader Price’s redundancy plan, the Créteil High Court resisted the Viveo ruling by invalidating the plan’s cancellation for lack of economic justification.
Our experts point out that, under French law, a PSE can be annulled on two grounds: when there is no redeployment plan, and when the procedure has not been followed. In the case of Leader Price and Vivéo, might there not be a temptation on the part of the lower courts to switch from a logic of compensation to one of obligation? To put it plainly, there would be a form of resistance on their part, totally in line with public opinion: it doesn’t seem moral or fair to lay off employees when the group as a whole is making profits. However, and this is why the Cour de Cassation remains firm on this decision: under French law, the judge cannot substitute himself for the employer in the management of the company. If this were the case, the major risk would be that foreign companies would be reluctant to invest in France for fear of not being able to withdraw in the event of difficulties, economic or otherwise.
To contest a redundancy plan, the option open to employees who feel they have been the victim of an injustice is to go to the industrial tribunal and claim damages.
To find out more about redundancy plans and the legal options available to employees to challenge them, this show is for you!
Program produced by Décideurs TV. June 2012.