How To Fix My Couch Thats Have A Torn

The wall of a Facebook page is not a private space

The decision to dismiss three employees for misconduct by their employer for bashing on the wall of a Facebook page has been substantiated by the industrial tribunal Boulogne-Billancourt.

This morning, Friday 19 November, the Council meeting as prud'hommmes tiebreaker (in the presence of a magistrate so professional), held that " pages that mention the words are a means of incriminating evidence of lawful character merits of the dismissal .

Advisors industrial tribunal had failed to decide on the privacy of an exchange posted on a Facebook page (CPH Boulogne-Billancourt, 20/05/2010 ).

This morning, the strictly private nature of the conversations about Facebook was not accepted by the court, stressing instead the public nature of the remarks.

is obviously the fact that words are accessible to many people who justified the dismissal, but it seems surprising that the private club that can represent the "Friends" Facebook has been unsuccessful. It is not impossible that the elements of context will be largely taken into account if similar cases were to come before the courts, namely the number of "friends", the fact that access to the employee's Facebook page is open or limited, etc.. In this case, an employee whose "wall" was the basis of the discussion had chosen to open access to its "friends" and "friends" of his "friends".

Anyway, the greatest caution is recommended for users of social networks too talkative!

CPH Boulogne-Billancourt, 19/11/2010.

Cantantes Mexicanas Follando

The contract between a production company to a candidate for reality TV is an employment contract

The Court of Appeal of Versailles confirmed on November 9 the decision of the industrial tribunal in Boulogne-Billancourt had reclassified the contract between TF1 Production and twelve ex-candidate the TV reality show "The Temptation Island" in the employment contract.

The ruling by the Court of Appeal of Versailles is in line with the jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation, which had already had occasion to rule on the qualifications of candidates for the contract between the producer of the reality TV program (Cass. soc., June 3, 2009, No. 08-40981, Sté Glem v. Brocheton).

The Court accepted the existence of an employment contract, particularly in terms of "the subordination lthough [between the production team and candidates] characterized by the existence of a "bible" provides the course of days, and the sequence of activities videotaped imposed and stagings duly repeated interview conducted so that the interviewee was led to say what would be expected by the production . This subordination was also characterized by the Court with " choice of clothing production, schedules imposed up to 20 hours a day, having to live on the site and unable to engage in personal business, the introduction of sanctions, including monetary penalties starting during filming or, ultimately, the obligation to monitor the activities planned and organized by the company LOK .

More than a subordinate, a true arm's length has been recognized by the Court of Appeal that the passports of the candidates and their telephones had been removed so that 'they were abroad.

Remuneration was paid to the same candidates, namely the sum of € 1,525 per qualified contract " guaranteed minimum non-refundable and finally acquired the participant an advance against royalties to be collected on farms merchandising and / or promotions involving the image of the participant, his / her name . The Court of Appeal expressly held that while the cause of such compensation was "performance of work .

And as if to erase any doubts that may arise over the legitimacy of such a reclassification, the Court of Appeal said that " even if the common intention of the parties would not was a relationship employer to employees, labor law, public order is intended to apply irrespective of the motivations and intentions of each party .

In that case, the Court of Appeal of Versailles opens an avenue for all candidates and former candidates for reality TV shows that can now ask the judge to draw conclusions a redefinition of their contract by providing benefits upon termination of their employment, particularly for non-compliance with the procedure for dismissal and overtime pay additional.

It is anticipated that many similar cases will be litigated in the coming months, especially since many transactions will be signed backstage.

CA Versailles, 6th c.., 09/11/2010, No. RG 09/03088