French labour laws trigger immense protests

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
What about a CDD? say you work in a CDD, then you are offered a CDI. Does the time you did in the CDD count against the trial period?

Yes, the duration of all the jobs you did for the same employer in the previous two years count against the trial period.

To me, it dounds like a bare minimum (though it will sound like some amazing protection when we indeed become an at-will state). But I can already think of ways to seriously **** the employer even with this provision, despite me not being an HR guy.

[Fake Boris]

Personally, I don't think that at-will labor laws are teh devil (Quebec is like this and it doesn't seem to create much problems), but it's a good thing that France will stand up against this corporate assault.

Besides, striking is fun, and you meet plenty of nice people

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Even if those kinds of jobs there is some training. A worker who has been at a place for a considerable period of time is a strong asset if the person has proved himself a hard worker and someone who is dependable.

Dependability is indeed the big plus in such jobs (because frankly, your know-how is worth little). And the most dependable workers are indeed likely to remain in a stable situation.

However, a great many workers aren't dependable. Especially when the employer has no loyalty toward its employees. Especially when the employee grew up having a problem with authority. I've heard plenty of employers complain how hard it is to find a dependable worker / housemaid / plumber / whatever. It seems dependable people are the exception, not the norm. I'm wondering what happens to the norm...

Even in jobs with little investment in the laborer, you're still likely to see more jobs created for them if labor is flexible and can move easily from struggling firms/industries to growing firms/industries. Firms/industries that are stuck with a labor population that is too great for the demand can often plunge downward if they can't compensate for a decrease in sales.

They can. There is indeed a bureaucratic process associated to it: the restructuration of your company should result in as little a job-loss as necessary (and this is purely theoretical already), the employer must look for job or formation prospects for the laid-off employees etc.
Personally, I think the job of re-integration should be the state's more than the company's. However, it is false to say that French companies can't layoff employees when things go wrong.

Sucsessful firms/industries that will in the long run employ more people are likely to spring up if there is a supply of labor available in the economy.

We have 10% unemployment, and that's already with tweaked figures. We have plenty of highly-educated people who can't find a job here, and who go abroad for one (Britain, Ireland, Canada and the US seem to be favourites). The problem is not with the supply of labour, we have plenty. The problem is with the supply of jobs.

France has a good thing going with much of it's social protections that it afford to it's population. And it's nice that unlike in the Anglo-Saxon countries, French workers don't end up with 50+ hour excessively long schedules. But the fact is you are facing agressive competition from everywhere. The key is to try to figure out how to keep conditions good for your workers while still remaining agile enough to deal with global competition.

That's the idea defended by the "social right-wingers" (supposedly Villepin's wing), and the socialist party. However, as a commie, I think the evolutions we're witnessing here are a logical -hack, obvious - consequence of globalized capitalism. And that if we don't enter a different paradigm, we're bound to see our working conditions erode further and further.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Besides, striking is fun, and you meet plenty of nice people

I wouldn't know, I never went on strike

[Pekka]

WORKERS RIGHTS! UUGAAUUGAA! WE WANT EVERYTHING AND NOT WORK FOR IT! GIVE US JOBS WITH GREAT SALARIES AND BENEFITS NOW!!!!

What can I say? Open fire.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pekka
WORKERS RIGHTS! UUGAAUUGAA! WE WANT EVERYTHING AND NOT WORK FOR IT! GIVE US JOBS WITH GREAT SALARIES AND BENEFITS NOW!!!!

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Spiffor

I wouldn't know, I never went on strike

so you wasted your time in a prepa?

[Pekka]

Spiffor, job pays x amount of money. Make a deal about working to do job x, you'll get paid x. If you want more, go and do the job that pays that z you want.

Of course, you should get the yearly raises and what ever, according to your contract. If you are unable to make a contract that suits you, then blame Bush.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

What are you trying to say? that the 800 richest students go to the GA and the rest stay at home?

Le Figaro is a crap journal, and everyone knows it. Anyone who has been to university GAs also knows that only a tiny fraction of the students show up. How you evaluate the legitimacy of a decision is usually how it is received by the rest.

im sayin that they are not representative. plus look how they are preventing votes from taking place to end the strike. the only reason they would do that is because they are afraid of losing the vote. that would seem to indicate that it isnt recieved well by at least some of the rest.

This is a gross mischaracterization. Among those who are interested in the matter, social-background won't give you a significant difference between the supporters or the opponents of student strikes.

source?

[DAVOUT]

I have been an employee for 20 years then an employer the 20 following years. I can understand therefore, as a former employee, that workers expect that the contract can be ended, but for a reason; I would have been ashamed not to do so. And, as many employers, I cant understand why the CPE has incorporated this feature without any discussion with business and syndicates representatives.
But, as a former employer, if I was not afraid to declare the reason why I decided to fire somebody, I was really refrained from hiring by the cost of the possible firing (procedural delays, indemnities, charges to be paid to social security and unemployment organisms). In my opinion, the CPE should withdraw the "no reason" article and include a provision that all costs of the firing will be paid by all workers and companies (as a support to the youth) and not by the young guy alone.
In this line of though, I suggest that all seniority premiums and advantages based on seniority, which are nothing more than a taxe paid by the youth to the seniors be progressively suppressed in the course of the nest 10 years.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
so you wasted your time in a prepa?

You're in Uni Bordeaux, so I guess you know Sciences Po there.

There.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
im sayin that they are not representative. plus look how they are preventing votes from taking place to end the strike. the only reason they would do that is because they are afraid of losing the vote. that would seem to indicate that it isnt recieved well by at least some of the rest.

There is a growing movement of students who want to study, regardless on whether they support the CPE or not (heck, I was today in a small working meet of the young commies, and one of us clearly stated that he wanted to go study, despite being as staunchly opposed as any of us to the CPE)
This movement isn't yet structurated and broad enough, otherwise it'd have probably hijacked the daily assemblies which decide whether the uni should go on strike or not (the "Assemblées Générales" or AG).

source?

My own experience with the movement, in which I've been part for nearly two monthes. I'm afraid there aren't any authoritative stats on the matter.
Your source, I suppose, is part of the propaganda that focuses only on the events at the Sorbonne, and which forgets about what happens in almost 100 other French unis (including a dozen of Parisian ones)*.
That propaganda continues unabated, despite the fact that 68% of the general population now opposes the CPE, and despite the fact that the massive demo of saturday attracted people from all backgrounds (be they age-, job-, or social-background-related)



*Incidentally, I know two people who are regulars at the Sorbonne riots. They are both politically motivated AND from lower-class immigrant origin and are failing their studies. Most certainly a statistical anomaly.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
You're taking your personal experience at extrapolating it to the entire economy. Companies that act in an idiotic fashion are going to inevitably suffer when they compete against other companies.

This isn't some controversial economic theory Che, this is common sense. If you were purchasing a service,

I've seen this happen too. Normally it is caused by one hand not talking to the other in the corporate ladder where the middle manager keeps hiring people because the upper manager doesn't tell anyone a lay off is coming. Another thing that happens is a company loses a contract and they're forced to cut their work force as a result. Normally it is last hired, first fired.

I agree that companies will attempt to act rationally but because they're often large organizations they have communications problems, unexpected things happen, or just plain poor planning.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Your source, I suppose, is part of the propaganda that focuses only on the events at the Sorbonne, and which forgets about what happens in almost 100 other French unis (including a dozen of Parisian ones)*.

but its not, since it was talking about universities in Tours, Dijon, and Toulouse. Im not talkin about violence, im just talking about occupying the universities and preventing classes from going forward, and the fact that the AGs are not allowing people to vote against the strikes.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
the fact that the AGs are not allowing people to vote against the strikes.