Re:Man wins the legal right to not be 'fun' at work
by connicpu on Sunday November 27, 2022 @02:21PM
(#33765774)
"difficult to work with and a poor listener" seems like it would have been the perfect standalone reason to fire someone, and they would have gotten away with it if they didn't cite refusing to participate in the after-work activities, but since they did cite the "fun" reason they got smacked down in court
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Man wins the legal right to not be 'fun' at work
by filleokus on Sunday November 27, 2022 @03:08PM
(#33766284)
Someone with more experience of French labor law should chip in, but in Sweden as an example, it's literally almost impossible to fire people for such reasons.
Most termination of employments here happens due to down scaling and then there is a first-in-first-out principle (which of course is skirted by categorising people differently so that different FIFO queues apply).
But being bad for just being slightly bad at ones work, or difficult to work with or something is almost unheard of after the up to 6 month probation period (during which the employment is basically at will).