Amount the aborted operations recorded a record 61This applies to biology as for the economyOscillation situations have already been met56 to 13613 dollar while it had declined 3Hire stars of football has never been the guarantee of winning the matchIn Britain TMobile and the operator 3 already doMarch 19 the international monetary fund has given the tempoWhat get the bankers to excellent managersEvery word is weighed each taking soupesée positionSomething has changed in the country of financeCould the measure during the crisis of the CPE: ILC employees fall into two categories, those who have two years of seniority and those who do. The first, the prior notice of at least two months (v.., art.) L. 122-6), the allowance for termination (v.., art.) L. 122-9) and, upon conviction of the employer for dismissal without cause real and serious, damage and interests to achieve minimum wages for six months (c. work., art.) L. 122-14-4). in the latter, except largesse of collective agreements, the shorter notice (a month, six months of age), the absence of termination and damages suffered harm. The question of what the Act is evidence of breach of the contract of employment for the assessment of seniority is therefore crucial. The Act provides guidance but which can lead to different interpretations: "the employer decides to terminate the employment of an employee shall notify the termination by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt;" the date of the registered letter sets the starting point of the notice. .
One could say that there are two modes of reading this article, the mode of "lazy" and of "punctilious". The point of view of the lazy, it is to retain the first date of the registered letter as suggested by Parliament which makes it the starting point of the notice: since we have at least a practical index on this aspect is of things, so apply it globally. Under this approach, the date of the day where the employee to the position is for the first time at the home of the recipient of the letter would serve not only to set the starting point of the délai-congé, but also to assess whether the employee was or not exceeded the threshold of two years. Convenient solution which sometimes row the Court of cassation (Cass. Soc.,. 2 Feb 1999)
Reasoning that to leave the rupture of this where the employee returns to Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce has to ce raisonnement, qui a à faire partir la rupture du Ce où le salarié revient faire Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce revient Ce a faire have knowledge, has also been adopted in material breach of the trial period (Cass. soc., 17 oct. 2000). Certainly, this way of judging could not satisfy the picky: they had beautiful game to point out that, if the legislature had taken the trouble to designate the first date of the letter in the dedicated segment of sentence at the start of the notice, it is because in his eyes it was an exception, the principle being any other.
The Court of cassation has long ranged between sloths and the picky. Thus, it considered that the formalism of the registered letter was not essential and only served to avoid discussions on the startup of the notice; the employer who, neglecting the recommended mailing, handed the letter of dismissal by hand against discharge, committed no irregularity (Cass. Soc.,. 15 Dec 1999). Suddenly, coup de theatre, is that condemns an employer unable to judge the acknowledgement of receipt of the letter (Cass. Soc.,. 2 July 2003). But everything was in believing that he was there to a decision of circumstance.
The three judgments by which the Court has just address the issue are, them labelled as front be published, so in principle cases. Now, the date of breach of contract is that of the registered letter is sent, i.e. that its filing to the position. Thus, an employee hired on December 9, 1999 and that the termination letter is filed on 7 December 2001 can claim damages from two years ' seniority (Cass. Soc., 26 sept. 2006, no. 05 - 43 841). Similarly, a commercial committed, for three months of testing, on 1 October, cannot claim the protection of the dismissal, on the pretext that the letter of break, although filed December 21, not before January 3. The employer, which had marked its determination to stop the test by sending the letter before December 31, could suffer from postal delays that he had not mastered (Cass. Soc., 26 sept. 2006, no. 05 - 44 670). On the other hand, the date of first submission continues to faith for the starting point of the notice (Cass. Soc.,. 7 nov 2006, no. 05 - 42 323).
