Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ohgodplsno 1469 days ago
Doubly so if it's alienating and you require them to come to work, as it is considered harassment and mental abuse.

you may however send the employee home with his full salary and no obligation to work. I know, worker protection is a crazy concept.
1 comments
Symbiote 1469 days ago
You started by quoting

>> You can definitely be paid laid off employee for a period of time, while having your access revoked.

and replying

> In France, this is a breach of contract

And now you write

> you may however send the employee home with his full salary and no obligation to work

Which was exactly the original claim!

I'm not sure if you misread or misunderstood, but you have been arguing incorrectly in most of your subsequent replies, and the sarcastic jibes at other countries don't help.

France is a more trusting society than the USA, so I won't be surprised if gardening leave is less common, but you can be sure it's sometimes used when employees of investment banks, defence contractors, the government, military etc are made redundant or resign.

link
ohgodplsno 1469 days ago
The core part of the problem is "you revoke his access". It's simple. You revoke someone's access, it is akin to firing, and it is illegal.

Send people home with their severence after the necessary period to inform the employee that they're getting fired, sure. But telling them out of the blue "Fuck off, don't come to work today, your access is revoked" is a breach of contract and is illegal.

So, no, you cannot be a paid laid off employee with no access. You're either employee, paid a salary and with access, or not an employee with your severance package and no access. There is no inbetween, and your lack of reading comprehension doesn't mean i misunderstood.

link
NikolaNovak 1469 days ago
It is not "Akin to firing", it IS an action following firing or laying off.

>>You're either employee, paid a salary and with access, or not an employee with your severance package and no access.

The latter. It's the latter. We've all been discussing the latter (or at least that's my impression, as that's what the original article is about, and certainly what my post was about :).

link