The ex-CEO Didier Lombard and five other former executives of the company expressed their “misunderstanding” in the face of the judgment which condemned them in December 2019 for “institutional moral harassment”.
by
Two and a half years have passed since the judgment which made them the first condemned for “institutional moral harassment”. It was December 20, 2019, and the Paris Criminal Court brought this notion of harassment “systemic, managerial” into case law in case law, attached to the name of France Telecom – which has become Orange -, a business strategy “aimed at destabilizing employees, to create an anxiety -provoking climate and having the object and effects a deterioration in working conditions “.
A historic victory for the civil parties, thirty-nine employees recognized victims, including nineteen agents who committed suicide between 2007 and 2010, and the unions behind the complaint. A burn for the former CEO, Didier Lombard, his ex-numéro two, Louis-Pierre Wenès, and four other executives or former executives of the company, who appealed to their sentences of four to eight months of Sub -filled prison – the maximum incurred was one year imprisonment – and fines of 5,000 to 15,000 euros, as well as in solidarity payment of nearly 3 million euros in damages.
Wednesday, May 11, their anger broke out from the first minutes of the hearing before the Paris Court of Appeal, when the president, Pascaline Chamboncel-Saligue, asked everyone to the facts that are accused of .
“Do you dispute your guilt?
– Absolutely, “replied Didier Lombard in a firm voice, the first to advance at the helm.
The ex-CEO, 80 years old, unfolded a small paper. “I consider that I was not listened to and that there was a manifest refusal to try to understand the policy that we have carried out. We were accused of having implemented a three -intended conspiracy to harass employees. Imagining this is to ignore the functioning of a company like France Telecom. Such a company works thanks to management bodies, a board of directors where representatives of the State and unions sit, as well as Local committees where employees sit. No movement can be decided without these local authorities being consulted. “
The tone is given. He is a man “deeply injured” by the expectations of the judgment and a combative defendant who faces his judges of appeal. “France Telecom is my house. Consider having wanted or does anything to degrade the working conditions of my colleagues, it is to disregard the attachment of an entire life spent in the service of France Telecom. Contrary, I did everything for this house. (…) I heard the suffering expressed during the investigation and the audience and I will remain forever deeply sorry. But I will continue to say that it ‘is not the policy I wanted. “
You have 61.54% of this article to read. The continuation is reserved for subscribers.