The CGT, which carried out this action, considers that the device should be reviewed.
By
Very awaited by employers and unions alike, the first court decision concerning a group action against union discrimination, created by the 2016 law on the modernization of justice, should also be of great interest to labor lawyers. Indeed, it is “lack of applicability” of this law in the present case that the Paris court of law dismissed the CGT metalworkers federation, which intended to have systemic union discrimination recognized at Safran Aircraft Engines.
In this judgment, rendered on December 15, the judge considers that between the date of application of the law, November 20, 2016, and the date of filing of this class action, November 30, 2018 , there is in this file “almost no” fact comparable to union discrimination. And that in any event, this period “proves objectively too short” to conclude that there is discrimination. This is what Safran argued. It would therefore be necessary to wait several years for the law to apply…
The CGT illustrated its approach by relying on the cases of 36 trade unionists working or having worked on seven sites of the aircraft engine manufacturer and satellites. She criticized this subsidiary of the former SNECMA for having roughed up, in the long term, these employees by differences in career development and remuneration, by annoyances, etc.
“No -retroactivity “of the law
At the heart of the subject is how to highlight discrimination – or the absence thereof. The CGT used the “panel” system, developed by François Clerc, a metallurgist from the central trade union responsible for discrimination for the confederation. This method, recognized by the Court of Cassation, consists of comparing the career development of trade unionists with those of employees who joined the company at the same time as them, in the same professional sector, at approximately the same age and with the same qualifications and training.
The career monitoring tool put in place by the company makes its comparisons with employees of the same professional category (managers, employees, technicians, workers) as the trade unionists, a field much broader than the sectors. This helps to “hide” discrimination, believes the CGT. For his part, the Defender of Rights, seized by the CGT, had, in May 2019, concluded that there was “collective and systemic” trade union discrimination in the company.
You have left 32.17% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.