Economists sometimes take us for children3 last year where it is established to 2With the key many steaks and roasts potentialWimbledon against Danone if I summarizedMorzine seems more affected by the crisisand the departments concerned work employmentA case that will have 15 years to developBanks still maintain thousands of tradersThe market for Chinese banks is about to closeThis option should help reduce the number of claimsA branch cannot, without objective reason, modulate the wages according to the only geographical location.
News
Those who do not know can no longer ignore it, the minimum wage applicable in the overseas departments is not the same as that of the metropolis. The gap created by the Act, is due to the difference in standard of living between the metropolitan France and the various overseas departments, who also each have their minimum wage. It is, however, more than forty years that the amount of the SMIC is standardized in the hexagon. The question of the differences on the workplace is therefore more legal. But it is not yet resolved, we will see, in the level of collective agreements or practices.
The point of view of the judges
Radio France, it was customary practice so-called "of zone" discounts on wages of the same category of staff, according to the institutions. Over a 100 index, is applied an allowance of 0.70 for Hérault, an allowance of 0.40 for the Drôme, Isère, Savoie, Alsace, Nancy, Lorraine, Champagne, Picardy, frequency North, the Puy-de Dôme, whilst other radio local more lucky (Provence, Vaucluse, Normandy Caen, Normandy Rouen, Cherbourg, Melun, Orléans, Berry South, towers) suffer no abatement. Thirteen employees of Montpellier to resist and challenge the arbitrary differential treatment which they consider contrary to the principle "to equal work, equal pay".
Branch defends itself by arguing that it is open to independent salary policies by setting. The employees contend that salary grid is determined by the company and not by each institution.
It is cheap, meets the employer, of a jurisprudence of the Court of cassation on June 1, 2005, which found within one economic unit and social (Siu), there could be of unequal treatment of one entity to another. However, once recognized, the Siu is deemed to be a single company and the companies making up the become similar institutions. It is therefore well the judgment of 1 June 2005 that the territorial framework of assessment of equality of treatment is the establishment and any company.
And Radio France recalled that, as held on several occasions the Court of cassation, disparities in treatment between employees of the same enterprise can be justified when they are the result of the negotiation by separate establishments (Cass. Soc.,. 27 oct 1999); Cass. Soc., 18 Jan. (2006).
Will this time, however, the Court of cassation admit not variation in wages according to geographical areas: "But whereas there may be differences in treatment between employees of different establishments of a same company exercising equal work or equal value if they are based on reasons as objective that a judge must control practical reality and relevance" (soc Cass.)21 Jan. 2009, no. 07 - 43 452).
Consequences for the company
The message is clear: in other cases where the Court had validated a disparity in treatment in institutions, there is an objective justification for this situation. In the case of the Siu, is gathered under a same banner of legally separate companies with one allocated shares of catering staff, not the other. For meals, geographic implantation and infrastructure differences may justify different solutions. When collective bargaining institutions, this means that such institutions have a real autonomy. But Radio France was unable to explain the abatements of area by an objective consideration. Therefore, we must be careful of any modulation of geographical order which is not duly justified.
