You've probably heard about the reorganization.
Elected officials have been very very bad and did not respect confidentiality. "There were leaks. Employees Lille and Nantes were informed that management was considering closing their site and transfer them to Niort. They have thus betrayed the trust of the Branch who wanted to work hand in hand with them.
But what exactly does it mean?
First, the notion of confidentiality.
Politicians of various institutions are held to a duty of confidentiality but not everything is confidential and the duty is due mainly from outside the company.
For information to be so, he must first declare that the Directorate as such at the time of delivery of information. Do not worry, she will not forget do it the very fact of a very systematic way. But this is not enough. It also requires that the information is really confidential.
The example may sound funny, but it's not because the management of T-Systems would write a document in the name of the President of the Republic with the words below that confidential information is genuinely confidential. You will agree without any problems. Well it's the same for most of the Directorate disseminates information to "elected". Case law tends to say that normally are confidential trade secrets or methods of manufacturing and accounting data. We
not forgotten that in staff representative bodies, there are "staff representatives". So what right do we hold information about the future of our colleagues without their talk ? Who better than the employees themselves can know what is important to them?
What were the consequences of the dissemination of information?
Management has been forced to reach out to employees of Nantes and Lille, before the project is completed, to talk and listen. What drama!
She was forced to realize that all were Lillois not thrilled to be mutated in Niort, they had a private life.
What led him to reconsider this project. Again, is this really a tragedy?
Certainly, today, we are always separated from Lille. But by selling the agency.
We do not know yet if it will be better for employees.
We do not know if the buyer will maintain employment for everyone.
We believe that, as in the sale of Marseille, only a collective struggle can provide safeguards for starters.
But employees of Lille can see a future and a job in Lille, rather than having only alternative to an abrupt removal or dismissal.
Let us reassure ourselves, to overcome these "leaks" has been put in place the "collective". If some elected
participate with real commitment to ensuring the interests of employees, there are now other guarantors of the famous confidentiality.
The information sent to this "collective" are not transmitted to all other staff representatives.
And when others ask their elected explanations, they explain that "this way they work seamlessly with management" that can not be otherwise because some elected officials "do not know to hold their tongues."
But it's not a question, it is a question of wanting.
We just do not forget that before being transformed into "social partner" by the various institutions employer, the employee representative bodies were carriers of the claims of employees against their leaders.
One might think that this view is outdated, we are not in a factory but in a business "intelligent people, executives, as we had so Peter said they Joudiou few years ago (which contempt for the workers!).
Yet is there much difference between the worker operated the hotline yesterday and today? While the average salary of the company that most of us lies within 20% of the highest paid French population. However, the lowest wage the firm is almost 10 times lower than the highest (and we only speak of direct wages).
So, no, things have not changed much. And yes, we will continue to disseminate information every time we think that you are most concerned and that the confidentiality clause is abusive .
Elected officials have been very very bad and did not respect confidentiality. "There were leaks. Employees Lille and Nantes were informed that management was considering closing their site and transfer them to Niort. They have thus betrayed the trust of the Branch who wanted to work hand in hand with them.
But what exactly does it mean?
First, the notion of confidentiality.
Politicians of various institutions are held to a duty of confidentiality but not everything is confidential and the duty is due mainly from outside the company.
For information to be so, he must first declare that the Directorate as such at the time of delivery of information. Do not worry, she will not forget do it the very fact of a very systematic way. But this is not enough. It also requires that the information is really confidential.
The example may sound funny, but it's not because the management of T-Systems would write a document in the name of the President of the Republic with the words below that confidential information is genuinely confidential. You will agree without any problems. Well it's the same for most of the Directorate disseminates information to "elected". Case law tends to say that normally are confidential trade secrets or methods of manufacturing and accounting data. We
not forgotten that in staff representative bodies, there are "staff representatives". So what right do we hold information about the future of our colleagues without their talk ? Who better than the employees themselves can know what is important to them?
What were the consequences of the dissemination of information?
Management has been forced to reach out to employees of Nantes and Lille, before the project is completed, to talk and listen. What drama!
She was forced to realize that all were Lillois not thrilled to be mutated in Niort, they had a private life.
What led him to reconsider this project. Again, is this really a tragedy?
Certainly, today, we are always separated from Lille. But by selling the agency.
We do not know yet if it will be better for employees.
We do not know if the buyer will maintain employment for everyone.
We believe that, as in the sale of Marseille, only a collective struggle can provide safeguards for starters.
But employees of Lille can see a future and a job in Lille, rather than having only alternative to an abrupt removal or dismissal.
Let us reassure ourselves, to overcome these "leaks" has been put in place the "collective". If some elected
participate with real commitment to ensuring the interests of employees, there are now other guarantors of the famous confidentiality.
The information sent to this "collective" are not transmitted to all other staff representatives.
And when others ask their elected explanations, they explain that "this way they work seamlessly with management" that can not be otherwise because some elected officials "do not know to hold their tongues."
But it's not a question, it is a question of wanting.
We just do not forget that before being transformed into "social partner" by the various institutions employer, the employee representative bodies were carriers of the claims of employees against their leaders.
One might think that this view is outdated, we are not in a factory but in a business "intelligent people, executives, as we had so Peter said they Joudiou few years ago (which contempt for the workers!).
Yet is there much difference between the worker operated the hotline yesterday and today? While the average salary of the company that most of us lies within 20% of the highest paid French population. However, the lowest wage the firm is almost 10 times lower than the highest (and we only speak of direct wages).
So, no, things have not changed much. And yes, we will continue to disseminate information every time we think that you are most concerned and that the confidentiality clause is abusive .
0 comments:
Post a Comment