Your employees on permanent contract may resign from their jobs. Their results should be clear and concise. Writing a document allows you to confirm this. But they can deny that they are teachers. How should a judge behave in such a situation? Response of the Court of Cassation.
Resignation: Appropriate formality
Your employees hired under the Permanent Employment Agreement (CDI) can terminate it by resigning from their jobs. This, at any time after their probation period is over. This decision must be voluntary. Their willingness to resign must be clear and unambiguous. You can not tell by their behavior alone (e.g. an employee who abruptly stops coming to work cannot resign).
This decision is final in principle. An employee who wishes to resign will not be able to withdraw and return to his job without your consent. But when in doubt of his will (e.g. if he resigned in anger) it is different. In this case, you have to accept his withdrawal and reinstate him. Otherwise, you could face the penalty of being fired without real and serious cause in the event of a dispute.
The resignation can be formalized by a simple verbal announcement. However, your collective agreement may require a draft of the written document. In any case, it is recommended that you prove your employee’s decision to resign in the event of a subsequent dispute.
To learn more about the resignation, we recommend our documents ” Manage ACTIV staff “This includes the Lumio interactive process” Managing the resignation of an employee You can also download the reply to our sample resignation letter.
But your employee may deny that you wrote this letter to the Industrial Tribunal. The Court of Cassation now specifies the follow-up that judges should give in such a dispute.
Resignation: Mail verification policy in the event of a dispute
In the case filed in the Cassation Court, a company hired an employee on a permanent contract and informed him that his trial period was coming to an end. A few months later he re-hired the employee on a permanent contract.
The employee subsequently seized the industrial tribunal. He argued that the company did not offer him a job. He was denied compensation by Pôle emploi for resigning under this second contract. However, he resigned and drew up a letter from his employer regarding this. He said it was a forgery made by a montage.
The Court of Appeals rejected the request for verification of what was written by the employee. On the basis that his resignation is clear and unquestionable and there is no claim to suggest that this document is a forgery. The employee also did not justify working at the company’s request after the contract was terminated following his resignation. It therefore rejected the employee’s claims for compensation for pay and incorrect termination of contract and illegal dismissal.
The employee challenged this decision. And the Court of Cassation sided with him. According to him, from Articles 287 and 288 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it is the responsibility of the judge to verify the competing writing in the event that the writing or signature of an individual deed is denied or ignored. If he is unable to make a decision without taking it into account or if he finds sufficient punitive elements in the case.
In this case, the employee challenged the credibility of his resignation letter. The court should therefore have conducted the signature test. The case is being re-assigned to another court.
Court of Cassation, Community Room, May 19, 2022, n ° 21-10.385 (When an employee disputes that a resignation letter has been drawn up, the judge must verify it unless he or she is able to judge without taking into account the competing writing or if he finds sufficiently convincing elements in the case)
Lawyer in Social Law and author of Tissot editions
Professional bacon fanatic. Explorer. Avid pop culture expert. Introvert. Amateur web evangelist.