Timeline for Boss says I'm stubborn when I don't agree
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 2021 at 18:16 | comment | added | eggyal | @Eugene I’m in UK, which may not have quite as strong worker protections as France but the fundamental point remains… if your employer wants you gone, they’ll go through whatever slog is necessary to get rid of you (or bypass the rules and deal with the fallout, depending how soon they want you out the door); meanwhile, your life working in such an environment or dealing with the legal/tribunal process will be pretty intolerable. | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 17:54 | comment | added | Eugene | @eggyal that's the case in the US, but OP is in France, where AFIK even firing someone for gross incompetence is a slog. | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 17:48 | comment | added | Daniel R. Collins | @eps: A statement can be both true and threatening. They're not mutually exclusive. | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 15:21 | comment | added | Peter Mortensen | It is under the EU "Machinery Directive", including in France. There are also more specific standards for particular kinds of equipment, e.g. mobile cranes. | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 15:03 | comment | added | eggyal | @eps: Whistleblower protections are a lovely idea in theory, but in practice it means you eventually get a bit more compensation when you sue them for firing you. At the end of the day if the boss doesn't want you there anymore, you don't have a job—and no court is going to (nor practically could) force people to work together if that's not what all parties want. | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 0:15 | comment | added | eps | @BigMadAndy but it's not threatening, it's the exact truth. A potentially serious safety issue was brought up and ignored. If something bad happens because of it, there could be serious legal consequences. France has strong worker protections. IANAL but if it is a serious safety issue, the OP has a strong chance of being covered under whistleblower protections: lexology.com/library/… . From the OP's description they would appear to fulfill the criteria. It's up the the OP to determine if it is serious enough to continue fighting | |
| Jun 30, 2021 at 20:06 | comment | added | BigMadAndy | "Point out to him, that since there's now a record trail (that can be found in discovery) of the safety issue being brought to his attention and ignored" - OP definitely shouldn't do that unless she wants to be fired. None of the bosses I've ever had would ever accept being threatened. | |
| Jun 30, 2021 at 17:00 | history | edited | Eugene | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 203 characters in body
|
| Jun 30, 2021 at 16:58 | comment | added | Eugene | @Anyon, ah damn, missed that | |
| Jun 30, 2021 at 16:47 | comment | added | Anyon | The question is tagged France, if you want to take that into account. | |
| Jun 30, 2021 at 16:38 | history | answered | Eugene | CC BY-SA 4.0 |