Frédéric Chhum

Frédéric CHHUM Avocat Associé - PARIS - Membre du conseil de l'ordre des avocats de Paris (Mandat 2019-2021)

Le Cabinet d’avocats Frédéric CHHUM conseille principalement des salariés, cadres, cadres dirigeants, dans le cadre de litiges avec leur employeur et/ ou de négociation de départs.

Le Cabinet d'avocats Frédéric CHHUM a aussi développé une expertise en droit du travail de l’audiovisuel (intermittents du spectacle, techniciens, artistes, journalistes, pigistes, cadres).

Il intervient dans les contentieux complexes en droit du travail (requalification de CDD en CDI à temps plein des intermittents du spectacle , heures supplémentaires

Publications

Droit du travail Paris

Télétravail en période de confinement : quels sont vos droits et vos devoirs ? - COVID 19 – CORONAVIRUS -

Un avocat du barreau de Paris répond à vos questions en période de confinement et de la crise du COVD19 à 8h45 sur BFM Paris.

Aujourd'hui les règles autour du télétravail avec Maître Frédéric Chhum, avocat et membre du Conseil de l’ordre des avocats du barreau de Paris.

Visionnez !  (cliquez sur le lien ci-dessous)

http://www.avocats.paris/actualites-evenements/teletravail

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

French Labour law - Conventional rupture (Rupture Conventionnelle) and Covid-19: should you wait until June 24, 2020 before signing it?

The information in this note is current as of April 3rd, 2020, but may change in particular depending on the publication of a forthcoming circular from the General Directorate of Labor.

Ordinance No. 2020-306 of March 25th, 2020 relates to the extension of deadlines expired during the health emergency period and to the adaptation of procedures during this same period.

This ordinance impacts conventional ruptures.

This note is based on an analysis sent by DIRECCTE 75 and published on the Facebook group Les Travaillistes.

1) Ordinance n ° 2020-306 of March 25, 2020 relating to the extension of expired deadlines during the sanitary period

1.1) Extension of time limits

Article 2 of Ordinance No. 2020-306 of March 25th, 2020 provides for an extension of time limits for "any act, remedy, legal action, formality, registration, declaration, notification or publication prescribed by law or regulation to penalty of nullity, sanction, lapsing, foreclosure, prescription, unenforceability, inadmissibility, expiration, withdrawal of office, application of a special scheme, non-existence or forfeiture of any right and which should have been accomplished during the period mentioned in Article 1 will be deemed to have been made on time if it has been made within a period which cannot exceed, from the end of this period, the period legally allowed to act, within the limit of two months ”.

1.2) Scope of application of orders for administrative matters (ord 25th of March 2020, art. 6)

The provisions of the ordinance apply to administrations, local authorities and public establishments of an administrative nature (EPA).

The DIRECCTE reports to the Ministry of Labor, the provisions apply to them.

1.3) Suspension of the deadlines imposed on the administration (ord  March 25th 2020, art. 7)

The administrative action deadlines are suspended.

The time limits following a decision, an agreement or an opinion can or must intervene or is acquired implicitly, and which have not expired on March 12th, 2020 are suspended until June 24, 2020 (Cf CNB document on the order relating to the extension of deadlines https://www.cnb.avocat.fr/sites/default/files/ordonnance_prorogation_des_delais_echus_cnb.pdf).

The decision to approve a contractual breach, being an implicit decision of the DIRECCTE, this measure is directly concerned by the extension of time limits.

2) Consequences of Ordinance No. 2020-306 of March 25th, 2020 for conventional ruptures

Recall that after at least one interview, as part of a contractual termination, the employer and the employee agree to terminate by mutual agreement their employment contract (article L. 1237-11 and following of the labor code).

They sign the CERFA conventional termination form which is available online.

The signing of the contractual termination makes the starting point of the withdrawal period of 15 calendar days.

At the end of the withdrawal period, the most diligent party sends the conventional rupture agreement to the DIRECCTE.

The DIRECCTE has an instruction period of fifteen working days, from the receipt of the request, to ensure the freedom of consent of the parties.

In the absence of notification within this period, the approval is deemed to have been acquired and the employment contract is terminated the day after the end of the withdrawal period.

We must distinguish 3 cases.

2.1) Conventional rupture (rupture conventionnelle) signed before February 25, 2020 inclusive and approval request filed before February 22nd, 2020 inclusive

If the contractual termination was signed before February 25, 2020 inclusive and the homologation request was submitted to the administration (by registered mail or via the TéléRC website) before February 22, 2020, it has been the object tacit approval within 15 days of filing.

The employment contract can therefore be terminated on the scheduled date.

2.2) Conventional rupture (rupture conventionnelle) signed before February 25th, 2020 inclusive and approval request filed after February 22nd, 2020 inclusive

If the contractual termination was signed before February 25, 2020 inclusive and the approval request was submitted to the administration (by registered mail or via the TéléRC website) after February 22, 2020, it will not be subject to tacit approval due to the suspension of the investigation periods (Article 7 of the Ordinance).

It could nevertheless be the subject of an express authorization on the part of DIRECCTE; the most diligent party may send DIRECCTE 75 the following elements by email:

o the rupture form (cerfa);

o proof of deposit (scanned acknowledgment or teleRC);

o the registration number in TéléRC;

o An email address of each party to whom the approval decision must be sent (employer and employee).

If no express approval decision was taken, the tacit approval of the rupture will take place at the end of the instruction period of 15 calendar days which is suspended from March 12, 2020 and which will resume from June 24, 2020 , date of the end of the protected legal period (the date is fixed at June 24, 2020 but it can be modified).

2.3) Conventional rupture (Rupture conventionnelle) signed after February 25th, 2020: no homologation

If the contractual termination was signed after February 25th, 2020, the withdrawal period being extended by article 2 of ordinance n ° 220-306 of March 25th, 2020, the Administration (DIRECCTE 75) indicates that it does not can no longer be approved.

The withdrawal period (droit de retractation) will end 15 days after the end of the protected legal period (the date is fixed at June 24, 2020 but it can be modified).

The Administration advises to send DIRECCTE a new request for homologation of a contractual breach after the end of the protected legal period (i.e. June 24, 2020 unless the date is changed).

Conclusion:

In view of the above, it is not possible to have conventional ruptures signed after February 25th, 2020 approved.

The parties will have an alternative:

- Postpone the signing of the contractual breach and send a new approval after June 24th, 2020 (provided that the end of the state of health emergency is not delayed);

- initiate a dismissal procedure and conclude a transaction. Recall that the contractual termination is an autonomous mode of termination of the employment contract and does not put an end to all litigation (unlike the transaction).

A rapid clarification of the position of the Labor Administration is necessary.

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

 

 

 

Ruptures conventionnelles et COVID-19 : peut-on signer une rupture conventionnelle pendant la « période juridiquement protégée » liée au Coronavirus ?

La présente brève est à jour au 8 avril 2020 et pourra être modifée selon la circulaire DGT qui va être publiée prochainement.

L’ordonnance n°2020-306 du 25 mars 2020 relative à la prorogation des délais échus pendant la période d’urgence sanitaire et à l’adaptation des procédures pendant cette même période impacte les ruptures conventionnelles.

La période juridiquement protégée débute le 12 mars 2020 et expire le 24 juin 2020 (sous réserve d’une prorogation).

La Direction Générale du Travail doit publier une circulaire prochainement.

Il faut distinguer 3 cas de figures.

2.1) Rupture Conventionnelle signée après le 25 février 2020 : pas d’homologation.

Si la rupture conventionnelle a été signée après le 25 février 2020, le délai de rétractation étant prorogé par l’article 2 de l’ordonnance n°220-306 du 25 mars 2020, l’Administration (DIRECCTE 75) indique qu’elle ne peut plus être homologuée.

Le délai de rétraction prendra fin 15 jours après la fin de la période juridique protégée (la date est fixée au 24 juin 2020 mais elle pourra être modifiée).

L’Administration conseille d’adresser à la DIRECCTE une nouvelle demande d’homologation de rupture conventionnelle après la fin de la période juridique protégée (soit le 24 juin 2020 sauf modification de la date).

2.2) Rupture Conventionnelle signée avant le 25 février 2020 inclus et demande d’homologation déposée avant le 22 février 2020 inclus.

Si la rupture conventionnelle a été signée avant le 25 février 2020 inclus et que la demande d’homologation a été déposée à l’administration (en courrier recommandé ou via le site TéléRC) avant le 22 février 2020, elle a bien fait l’objet d’une homologation tacite dans les 15 jours qui suivent son dépôt.

Le contrat de travail peut donc être rompu à la date prévue.

2.3) Rupture Conventionnelle signée avant le 25 février 2020 inclus et demande d’homologation déposée après le 22 février 2020 inclus.

Si la rupture conventionnelle a été signée avant le 25 février 2020 inclus et que la demande d’homologation a été déposée à l’administration (en courrier recommandé ou via le site TéléRC) après le 22 février 2020, elle ne fera pas l’objet d’une homologation tacite en raison de la suspension des délais d’instruction (article 7 de l’ordonnance).

Elle pourrait néanmoins faire l’objet d’une autorisation expresse de la part de la DIRECCTE ; la partie la plus diligente peut adresser à la DIRECCTE 75 par email les éléments suivants :

  • le formulaire de rupture (cerfa) ;
  • la preuve du dépôt (accusé de réception scanné ou téléRC) ;
  • le numéro d’enregistrement dans TéléRC ;
  • Une adresse mail de chaque partie à qui la décision d’homologation doit être envoyée (employeur et salarié).

Si aucune décision expresse d’homologation n’était prise, l’homologation tacite de la rupture interviendra à la fin du délai d’instruction de 15 jours calendaires qui est suspendu à compter du 12 mars 2020 et qui reprendra à compter du 24 juin 2020, date de la fin de la période juridique protégée (la date est fixée au 24 juin 2020 mais elle pourra être modifiée).

Conclusion.

Compte tenu de ce qui précède, il n’est pas possible de faire homologuer les ruptures conventionnelles signées après le 25 février 2020.

Les parties auront une alternative :

  • Décaler la signature de la rupture conventionnelle et adresser une nouvelle homologation après le 24 juin 2020 (sous réserve que la fin de l’état d’urgence sanitaire ne soit pas décalé) ;
  • Engager une procédure de licenciement et conclure une transaction. Rappelons que la rupture conventionnelle est un mode autonome de rupture de contrat de travail et ne mets pas fin à tout litige (contrairement à la transaction).

Une clarification rapide de la position de l’Administration du travail est nécessaire

Pour lire l’intégralité de la brève, cliquez sur le lien ci-dessous.

https://www.village-justice.com/articles/rupture-conventionnelle-covid-faut-attendre-juin-2020-avant-signer,34571.html

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

French labour law : Telework (télétravail) and Covid-19: employees, what are your rights and obligations? CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

On March 16, President Macron declared that France was in a "health war" and announced the prohibition of any movement that is not justified by one of the reasons exhaustively listed by decree (decree n ° 2020-260 of March 16 2020 and decree n ° 2020-293 of March 23, 2020).

On the same day, the Ministry of Labor stated in a press release, that work was "the imperative rule for all the positions which allow it".

However, this form of work organization, which is still not very widespread in French companies (according to DARES, only 7% of employees were teleworking in 2019: https://travail-emploi.gouv.fr/actualites/presse/communiques-de-presse/article/coronavirus-covid-19-et-monde-du-travail), raises many questions to which the present article will try to provide clear and concrete answers.

1) What is telework (télétravail) ?

Teleworking is defined by Article L. 1222-9 of the Labor Code as “any form of work organization in which work which could also have been performed on the employer's premises is carried out by an employee outside of these premises on a voluntary basis using information and communication technologies ”.

It can be regular or occasional, take several forms and exercise in different places.

It thus covers a multitude of different situations, ranging from the employee who benefits from a working day at home to the one who punctually uses information and communication technologies (sending email, conference calls, etc.) during his movements.

2) In which cases is teleworking compulsory?

In principle, teleworking must be the subject of an agreement between the employee and his employer. (Article L.1222-9 of the Labor Code)

However, “in exceptional circumstances, in particular the threat of an epidemic or in the event of force majeure, the implementation of telework can be considered as an arrangement of the work station made necessary to allow the continuity of the activity of the and guarantee the protection of employees. "(Article L.1222-11 of the Labor Code)

However, in the context of the fight against Covid-19, teleworking has become the rule and is imposed on both the employer and the employee as soon as the position concerned allows it.

Indeed, if the aforementioned decrees of March 16 and 23, 2020 authorize travel between home and work and professional travel which cannot be postponed without more precision, the press release from the Ministry of Labor is much more restrictive since he specifies that it is "imperative that all employees who can telework use telework until further notice".

The derogatory travel authorization posted online on the government website also covers travel between home and the place of professional practice when it is essential for the exercise of activities that cannot be organized in the form of telework. and business trips cannot be postponed. https://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Actualites/L-actu-du-Ministere/Attestation-de-deplacement-derogatoire-et-justificatif-de-deplacement-professionnel

Telework is therefore excluded only in cases where the job performed by the employee cannot be organized in this form.

Otherwise, it is strictly mandatory to use it.

In this regard, according to the Ministry of Labor, almost 8 million jobs (or more than 4 jobs out of 10 in the private sector) are now compatible with teleworking so that it should find '' apply for a very large number of employees.

3) How should my working time be organized?

With regard to teleworking, a distinction must be made between working hours on the one hand and the employee's time slots on the other.

3.1) The employer must enforce the maximum hours of work and rest

Regarding working hours, although the rules for counting working hours are more difficult to implement when the employee is at home, the employer remains responsible for controlling the working time of his employees. (Decree of May 30, 2006 extending the national interprofessional agreement relating to telework: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000640310&categorieLien=id)

Indeed, telework does not exempt the employer from ensuring compliance with maximum working hours and rest periods.

It is therefore up to him to set up a reliable system for counting working hours (self-declaration system, system for monitoring connection times on the computer, etc.); even if the employee freely manages his working hours.

Similarly, if the employee works overtime, it must be paid to him.

The workload entrusted to the worker must moreover be comparable to that applicable when the work is carried out on the premises of the company (article 9 of the national interprofessional agreement of July 19, 2005 relating to teleworking).

For employees on a day pass, the employer must always ensure compliance with the minimum daily rest of 11 hours and the weekly rest of 35 hours minimum as well as the maximum durations.

3.2) Availability time slots during which the employee must be reachable

Contrary to the work carried out within the premises of the company, teleworking supposes the fixing of time slots on which the employee must be reachable.

As a result, the employee, who freely manages his working time, is not forced to be permanently available in case his employer wants to join him.

Outside these hours, he cannot be penalized for not having replied to his employer. (Cass. Soc., 17 Feb 2004, n ° 01-45889)

4) Must my employer provide me with equipment and / or cover my equipment costs?

In principle, it is up to the employer, who is responsible for paying the professional costs incurred by his employees, to bear the costs induced by teleworking.

Thus, the rule is that the employer will bear part of the costs of heating, electricity, internet, telephone, etc. as well as the acquisition of the material necessary for the performance of the work, if it is not provided by the company.

This can be done by paying a flat-rate allowance covering all of the telecommuting costs or by reimbursing the invoice.

However, it remains to be seen whether this rule will be maintained in the context of the telework imposed for the fight against the spread of the Covid-19 virus or whether it will be adapted to take account of the particularity of this situation.

5) Do I have the right to compensation for occupying my home?

In principle, the employee who works at his home must be compensated for this particular hardship as soon as no professional premises are made available to him by the company (Cass. Soc., 4 Dec. 2013, n ° 12- 19.667, n ° 2092 FS - P + B Cass. Soc., Sep 21, 2016, n ° 15-11.144 Cass. Soc., March 27, 2019, n ° 17-21.014, n ° 534 FS - P + B).

This so-called "occupancy" allowance is in addition to the reimbursement of costs incurred by the professional occupation of the home (electricity, heating, internet, etc.).

In our opinion, it is not due to the employees placed in teleworking within the framework of the rules against Covid-19.

Indeed, according to case law, the right to this occupancy allowance depends on whether the occupation of the employee's private home in the context of teleworking is imposed by the absence of work premises made available by the employer.

6) What happens if I have an accident at my home while I was teleworking?

When the employee is the victim of an accident while he is teleworking, this accident must in principle be considered as an accident at work as soon as it occurred occasionally or as a result of work. (Article 411-1 of the Social Security Code)

The accident must, as such, be the subject of a declaration by the employee to his employer by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt within 48 hours of its occurrence.

However, proof of professional character (accident du travail) is much more difficult.

The presumption of the professional nature of the accident applies according to the rules of ordinary law to the teleworker as soon as it has occurred at the place and time of work. (Article L.1222-9 of the Labor Code)

The whole difficulty therefore lies in proving the occurrence of the accident during working time.

Failing to demonstrate that the accident occurred at the home of the teleworker during his working time, he will be deprived of the benefit of the presumption and will have to prove the causal link between the accident and his work. (Circular letter DSS-SDFATH / B4 n ° 98-161 R, 7 July 1998: BJ Uncanss 41-98)

7) How to do when my job is not workable in teleworking?

7.1) The employer must enforce barrier gestures (gestes barriers) and social distancing rules (règles de distanciation sociale)

When employment is not eligible for teleworking, the employer must guarantee for its employees that barrier gestures and rules of social distancing are strictly observed in the workplace.

In this regard, the Ministry of Labor invites companies to adapt the organization of work so as to limit groupings as much as possible, in particular by implementing staggered hours.

In this regard, it should be recalled that the employer is bound by an obligation of security of result with regard to all his employees and that he must therefore implement all the measures necessary to protect their health and their security. (Article L. 4121-1 of the Labor Code)

7.2) Otherwise, the employee's right of withdrawal (droit de retrait)

If this were not the case, the employee would be entitled to exercise his right of withdrawal. (cf. COVID-19 The point on the right of withdrawal of employees https://www.village-justice.com/articles/covid-point-sur-droit-retrait-d...).

7.3) Right of alert of the CSE (Comité d’entreprise ou Comité Social et Economique) in application of article L. 4131-2 and L. 4132-2

In the event of non-compliance with barrier gestures and rules of social distancing which would endanger employees, the CSE can exercise its right of alert.

Article L4131-2 of the Labor Code provides that: "The staff representative on the social and economic committee, who finds that there is a cause of serious and imminent danger, in particular through the intermediary of a worker, immediately alert the employer according to the procedure provided for in the first paragraph of article L. 4132-2. "

However, given its urgency, the alert does not need to result from a collective decision of the CSE, it can be issued by a member of the CSE individually.

To do this, he must not only immediately notify the employer, but also record this opinion in a special register, the notice must contain the following information:

- The indication of the workstation (s) concerned;

- The names of the employees concerned;

- The nature of the danger and its cause. (Article D. 4132-1 of the labor code)

This immediately triggers the employer's obligation to investigate with the CSE member who reported the alert, and to take the necessary steps to put an end to the danger. (Article L.4132-2 of the Labor Code)

7.4) The special case of parents of children under the age of 16 who have no childcare solution

Concerning the parents of children under 16 whose employment cannot be carried out by telework and who do not have a childcare solution, they can request a sick leave compensated by health insurance. without waiting period. (Decree No. 2020-73 of January 31, 2020 adopting adapted conditions for the benefit of cash benefits for people exposed to the coronavirus: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000041513432&categorieLien=cid)

The employer cannot then refuse this work stoppage.

8) What should I do if my employer refuses to telework (télétravail) ?

When the job is achievable in telework, even partially, and the employer refuses it, the only solution remains the exercise of your right of withdrawal in application of article L. 4131-1 of the labor code (cf. COVID-19 Update on employees' right of withdrawal https://www.village-justice.com/articles/covid-point-sur-droit-retrait-des-salaries,34403.html).

Sources:

. Certificate of derogatory travel (decree of 23 March 2020)

https://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Actualites/L-actu-du-Ministere/Attestation-de-deplacement-derogatoire-et-justificatif-de-deplacement-professionnel

. Article L. 4131-1 of the labor code on the right of withdrawal of the employee https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000006903155&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006072050&dateTexte=20080501

. Decree 2020-260 of March 16, 2020

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000041728476&categorieLien=id

. Decree 2020-293 of March 23, 2020

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000041746694&categorieLien=id

. Order of May 30, 2006, extending the national interprofessional agreement relating to telework: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000640310&categorieLien=id)

. Decree n ° 2020-73 dated 31 January 2020 adopting suitable conditions for the benefit of cash benefits for people exposed to the coronavirus:

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000041513432&categorieLien=cid

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

Marilou OLLIVIER avocat

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

French Labour law - Telework (télétravail) and COVID-19: Employees, what are your rights? What are your remedies? Maître Frédéric CHHUM's interview on BFM Paris

The subject of the interview was the rights of employees to telework (télétravail) during the Coronavirus period.

To watch the interview of March 30, 2020 of Maître Frédéric CHHUM on BFM Paris, click on one of the links below.

https://twitter.com/BFMParis/status/1244531817501331459

https://www.bfmtv.com/emission/crise-du-coronavirus-vos-droitsbfm-paris-et-le-barreau-de-paris-repondent-aux-questions-des-franciliens-1884735.html#

https://www.bfmtv.com/mediaplayer/video/teletravail-quelles-regles-a-respecter-pendant-le-confinement-1234774.html

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

 

 

 

French Labour law : Coronavirus and Conseil de Prud’hommes: what happens to the Hearings during the COVID-19 Period?

What happens to the hearings before the Paris industrial tribunal (conseil de prud’hommes de Paris) during the CORONAVIRUS period?

1) Paris industrial tribunal (conseil de prud’hommes)

The Paris Industrial Court provides telephone reception only from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.

Requests before the Paris Labor Court can always be sent by mail.

Before the Paris Industrial Court, the hearings have been canceled since March 17, 2020 and until further notice.

It is possible to communicate with the Paris Labor Council by email cph-paris@justice.fr

 2) Paris and Civil Hearings before the Social Pole of the Paris Judicial Court (Tribunal judiciaire de Paris)

 Pursuant to Article 4 of Ordinance No. 2020-304 of March 25, 2020 adaptation, the hearings before the industrial tribunal ruling in severance scheduled between March 16, 2020 and at the latest, the expiration of a period of one month from the date of termination of the state of emergency sanitary declared under the conditions of article 4 of the law 2020-306 of March 25, 2020, are deleted and returned to a later date which will be communicated when circumstances allow (Note from the Paris Court of Justice of March 30, 2020 PJ to download below in pdf).

 The same applies to civil hearings before the social pole (medical and non-medical social security disputes, disputes relating to admission to social assistance, disputes relating to professional elections, civil disputes relating to social and labor law labor, consumer litigation, social referrals) (Note from the Paris Court of Justice of March 30, 2020 PJ to download below in pdf).

 3) Nanterre and Boulogne-Billancourt industrial tribunal (Conseil de prud’hommes de Nanterre et de Boulogne-Billancourt)

The Labor Councils of NANTERRE and BOULOGNE-BILLANCOURT are closed.

No referral mechanism is provided for in the area.

Please note that this information is up to date on April 1, 2020 and it may change.

Frédéric CHHUM avocat and member of the council of the Paris Bar (mandate 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

Droit de retrait et COVID-19 / CORONAVIRUS : salariés quels sont vos droits ?

1) Rappel du régime général du droit de retrait.

1.1) Notion et définition du danger grave et imminent.

L’article L4131-1 du Code du travail dispose que « Le travailleur alerte immédiatement l’employeur de toute situation de travail dont il a un motif raisonnable de penser qu’elle présente un danger grave et imminent pour sa vie ou sa santé ainsi que de toute défectuosité qu’il constate dans les systèmes de protection.

Il peut se retirer d’une telle situation.

L’employeur ne peut demander au travailleur qui a fait usage de son droit de retrait de reprendre son activité dans une situation de travail où persiste un danger grave et imminent résultant notamment d’une défectuosité du système de protection. »

Une circulaire ministérielle n°93-15 du 25 mars 1993 précise s’agissant du danger grave qu’il peut être caractérisé lorsqu’il est susceptible d’entraîner la mort ou une incapacité permanente ou temporaire prolongée. S’agissant du danger imminent la même circulaire précise que peut être qualifié d’imminent, tout danger susceptible de se réaliser brutalement dans un délai rapproché.

Aussi, en vertu de son droit de retrait, tout salarié a le droit d’interrompre son travail et de quitter son poste de travail.

A titre d’exemple, le droit de retrait de 126 agents de la SNCF a pu être légitimement exercé à la suite d’une agression de contrôleurs et dès lors que les agresseurs n’avaient pas été interpellés [1]

Par ailleurs, le droit de retrait peut également être exercé en cas de souffrance moral.

Ainsi, des formateurs d’un centre de formation d’apprentis avaient exercé leur droit de retrait du fait de situations de plus en plus difficiles dues aux comportements des apprentis.

Ils invoquaient donc une situation de stress permanent et un refus d’écoute et de soutien de la part de la Direction. Pour l’employeur, il s’agissait seulement d’une réaction suite à la sanction disciplinaire de l’un de leurs collègues.

La Cour de cassation juge néanmoins que la situation de souffrance morale, ayant été constatée par le médecin du travail, constitue un motif raisonnable de penser que cette situation présentait un danger grave et imminent [2]

1.2) Le motif raisonnable.

La notion de danger est nécessairement subjective.

De fait, pour être légitime, le salarié doit avoir un motif raisonnable de penser que la situation de travail présente un danger grave et imminent, quand bien même finalement le danger ne se confirme pas ou est moins grave qu’attendu

Cette distinction est primordiale, dès lors que le danger n’a pas être effectif et réel, il suffit que le salarié ait estimé raisonnablement qu’existait un danger grave et imminent pour sa santé, étant précisé que cette notion est appréciée par les juges du point de vue du salarié compte tenu de ses connaissances et de son expérience.

A cet égard, dans un arrêt publié du 9 mai 2000, la Cour de cassation a cassé l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel qui avait rejeté les demandes du salarié aux motif que : « l’exécution des travaux ne nécessitait la mise en place d’aucune protection particulière des salariés ».

La Cour de cassation affirme « Qu’en statuant ainsi, sans rechercher, comme elle y avait été invitée, si le salarié justifiait d’un motif raisonnable de penser que la situation de travail présentait un danger grave et imminent pour sa vie et sa santé et nécessitait une mesure de protection collective destinée à empêcher les chutes de personnes par application de l’article 5 du décret n° 65-48 du 8 janvier 1965, la cour d’appel a privé sa décision de base légale. » [3]

A titre d’exemple également, a été jugé justifié le droit de retrait d’un chauffeur routier qui n’ayant pas la certitude que la réparation de son camion avait été effectuée avait refusé de le conduire dès lors que ce camion avait fait l’objet préalable d’une interdiction de circuler [4]

Aussi, la situation est appréciée au cas par cas par les juges afin de tenir compte de l’expérience du salarié, de sa qualification de son ancienneté, de son expérience, de son âge, de sa santé et des circonstances du moment.

Il faut néanmoins préciser qu’en l’absence de définition légale ou jurisprudentielle établie du danger grave et imminent ou du motif raisonnable, l’exercice du droit de retrait revêt une insécurité juridique pour le salarié qui l’exerce, sa légitimité relevant de l’appréciation souveraine des juges du fond.

Pour lire l’intégralité de la brève, cliquez sur le lien ci-dessous.

https://www.village-justice.com/articles/covid-point-sur-droit-retrait-des-salaries,34403.html

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

Mathilde MERMET-GUYENNET avocat

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 4 rue Bayard 75008 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: 25, rue Gounod 59000 Lille tel: 0320135083

Charger la suite

Contact
Nom



Prénom



Téléphone



Adresse mail



Message


ADRESSES
4, rue Bayard
75008 Paris

41, quai de la Fosse
44000 Nantes

CONTACTS
Paris : 01.42.89.24.48
Nantes : 02.28.44.26.44

INFOS

  • Selarl Frédéric CHHUM AVOCATS
  • Capital de 60.000 euros
  • RCS Paris 831 146 436