The Minister of Health Olivier Véran.

-

Jacques Witt / SIPA

  • Paris and the inner suburbs have been on “maximum alert” since Sunday because of the coronavirus epidemic.

  • While the government has imposed new restrictions, teleworking remains at the discretion of companies.

  • A lawyer interviewed by

    20 Minutes

    believes that an obligation that is too broad could be challenged.

Should the government toughen up on telework?

The question arises as Paris and its inner suburbs - nearly 7 million inhabitants - have just switched to "maximum alert" on Sunday evening.

Health indicators have indeed deteriorated in recent days in Ile-de-France, particularly in intensive care, where Covid patients occupy 36% of available beds.

If the executive has decided to close the bars in the capital and impose new mandatory measures on restaurants as of Tuesday, it has however been more flexible on the issue of home work.

On Monday, the Ministry of Labor explained in a statement that “it appears necessary to intensify teleworking for companies in the areas concerned, through social dialogue”.

"We trust the social partners to succeed (...) in implementing these measures in consultation", indicates in the same text Laurent Pietraszewski, Secretary of State for Pensions and Occupational Health.

Crowded subways

In short, if the government strongly encourages companies to implement teleworking, it does not take any binding decision.

A speech that contrasts with that held at the time of confinement, last March.

At the time, the Ministry of Labor explained that it was "imperative that all employees who can telework use telework until further notice".

Today, "these recommendations for teleworking are followed from afar", testifies Jérôme Vivenza, confederal secretary at the CGT quoted by AFP, ensuring that companies invite employees to come back to work "face-to-face".

On social networks, this lack of obligation to telework is strongly criticized, especially by public transport users who find themselves in crowded subways:

Line 13 this morning.

What is the government waiting for to impose #working?

#MaximumAlert # COVID19 pic.twitter.com/z2z4zSOIiG

- Maximilien (@maximilien_rt) October 5, 2020

#RERD armored blocked until recourse to teleworking is made compulsory, the virus will circulate in IDF.

Employers, including institutional ones, are not playing the game. # COVID19france

- Djej 🦅 (@DelDjej) October 5, 2020

I understand that the employees are favorable but not the employers.

And without clear directives from the Government, #working will remain an option while the health situation in #AlerteMaximale zones should impose it.

Public health requires courage.

https://t.co/ycT0Us6VmX

- Gabriel Farhi (@ravgab) October 5, 2020

So why isn't the executive taking a firmer stance?

When questioned on the subject, the Ministry of Labor did not answer our questions.

So we had to ask elsewhere.

"In theory, the government could decide to make teleworking compulsory," assures Laurent Parras, a lawyer specializing in labor law.

But he immediately specifies that putting such a law into practice would be perilous: “during confinement, people were forced to stay at home, so by definition, it was easier to impose to work at home.

Moreover, a law making telework compulsory could represent a disproportionate interference with the freedom to undertake or work, and would therefore risk being censored by the Constitutional Council.

The current law seems to me sufficient ”.

Article L 1222-11 of the Labor Code indicates that “in the event of exceptional circumstances, in particular the threat of an epidemic (…), the implementation of teleworking can be considered as an adaptation of the workstation. necessary to allow the continuity of the company's activity and guarantee the protection of employees ”.

But it is up to the employer to decide when to initiate this procedure.

"We lost time"

For the lawyer, companies have every interest in using this law: “employers will be accountable for the health consequences of their bad actions.

If people are infected and fall ill in a company when teleworking was possible, they could attack the employer for inexcusable misconduct and obtain compensation ”.

In other words, even if no legal text formally obliges companies to resort to teleworking, the health context and the obligation of safety vis-à-vis their employees should strongly make them think.

"What bothers me is not that the government remains in the incentive, it is especially the attitude of the representatives of the employers vis-a-vis teleworking" tackles Cyril Chabanier, president of the CFTC.

“For months we have been asking to open negotiations on the subject to put in place a framework agreement for all companies, so that everyone can have benchmarks.

The employers have taken their time and the first meeting will be held on November 3, but it is not known what the state of the epidemic will be at that time.

We lost time and that's a shame ”.

The Medef also indicated that it did not want a "normative" agreement, that is to say carrying obligations for employers.

The incentive still has a bright future ahead.

Economy

Coronavirus: Government advocates teleworking, unions want a clear framework

Economy

Teleworking: For pets, a boon (which has its limits)

  • Patronage

  • Covid 19

  • Teleworking

  • Coronavirus

  • Union

  • Economy