French labour laws trigger immense protests

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


They are not wrong in all respect; part of the support comes from people like me, who have had a long experience of the work in companies, and who cannot accept, as an employee or an employer, the firing without explanation or that it takes two years to discover that a guy does not work properly.

And so because a given set of management didn't have the cahoneys to fire the lazy SOB after 3-6 months when they saw the person wasn't working out, it has been decided that you will punish all future sets of managements of the company by not allowing them to rectify mistakes made by their predecessors.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


And so because a given set of management didn't have the cahoneys to fire the lazy SOB after 3-6 months when they saw the person wasn't working out, it has been decided that you will punish all future sets of managements of the company by not allowing them to rectify mistakes made by their predecessors.

Many difficulties in the working life of the employes are not a consequence of capitalism but of poor management.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Ce soir, le stade rennais affronte montpellier aux quarts de finale de la coupe. vous avez des pronos?

[DAVOUT]

L'Equipe ne se fatigue pas trop (Rennes favori), et moi, sarthois de naissance, je ne peux préférer Montpellier à Rennes.

Moderator, I exceptionnaly use a foreign language in order to help an European in the difficult understanding of a very delicate advice.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


Many difficulties in the working life of the employes are not a consequence of capitalism but of poor management.

Agreed so why handcuff new generations of management from being able to address sins of the past.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Agreed so why handcuff new generations of management from being able to address sins of the past.

I am not sure that I understand, because the CPE affair would not have helped the management. As for the sins of the past, it will demonstrate once more, that results impossible to reach by certain people using certain tools, can be reached by other men using the same tools. Talent, courage and tenacity are much more efficient than a law poorly though.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


I am not sure that I understand, because the CPE affair would not have helped the management. As for the sins of the past, it will demonstrate once more, that results impossible to reach by certain people using certain tools, can be reached by other men using the same tools. Talent, courage and tenacity are much more efficient than a law poorly though.

This was in response to your original claim that it would be wrong to fire people with seniority of 2 or more years. There often is such a thing as addition by substraction. You get a bad apple that needs to be gone and will make your organization stronger as a result.

Case in point, at my company we had a senior Chemist of French nationality as coincidence would have it who refused to document his work, refused to play nicely with others in the development team, brow beat any who challenged any of his 'findings'. The conseqeunce of having this guy on the payroll poisoned our company's morale, delayed product introductions, gave us inferior product, prevented us from fixing issues and caused many a good employee to leave the company rather than deal another single day with him.

Were management restricted from dealing with this individual by government edict the company would continue to suck today.

[JohnT]

I took the liberty of opening a new thread, given that this one is so close to being closed and all... http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showt...hreadid=151026

[DAVOUT]

Ogie,

This was in response to your original claim that it would be wrong to fire people with seniority of 2 or more years.

I did not say that, nor I meant that.

This is what I said

part of the support comes from people like me, who have had a long experience of the work in companies, and who cannot accept, as an employee or an employer, the firing without explanation or that it takes two years to discover that a guy does not work properly.

It means that, in my opinion, there is no need of two years to build an opinion on a worker; one month, may be two or three, are enough. As the two years period of the CPE was supposed to be a trial period, I meant that two years were too much for trial, but of course the seniority does not prevent firing for all other reasons.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by DAVOUT

It means that, in my opinion, there is no need of two years to build an opinion on a worker; one month, may be two or three, are enough. As the two years period of the CPE was supposed to be a trial period, I meant that two years were too much for trial, but of course the seniority does not prevent firing for all other reasons.

I would simply say that a two year trial period assumes the person is in a given role (and yes if you can't determine if a person is a good fit with your company within 2 years in a given role you are pretty poorly managed). However job mobility often means the person while good a a starting role has no future in more senior roles and often this is impossible to guage save to put the person in that more senior role. By that time the 2 years have most times gone by the wayside and demoting the person back to old job roles is not usually an option.