The conflicts that animate the prud’hommes reflect on a daily basis our social history. The hearing in the office of the court shall be public. Regularly, a journalist for The Express purpose of attending the debates.

Paris (conseil des prud’hommes, section coaching, April 18, 2018 14: 30.

This is a composition almost exclusively of women, who comprised the office of judgment, because the president is surrounded by two counselors and a counselor, and two female lawyers face them.

The president: “The society is in demand. It’s not often, but it’s still.”

The adviser: “With seven pages all the same…”

The president: “What are the demands?”

The lawyer of the employer: “The company that I have the honour to represent is a global group audit, statutory auditors, management and strategy consulting. She has hired the employee on September 16, 2010 and left on October 2, 2015 by resignation. Indeed, he resigned without notice, but this is not the debate. I demand the repayment of the loan of 109 779,83 euros that has been granted to the employee and 700 euros to article 700.”

The president (the lawyer of Charles (1)): “And you?”

The lawyer of Charles: “2 000 euros to article 700.”

The president: “We listen to you.”

The lawyer of the employer: “The company that I represent has 6 500 employees in France. The employee wanted to do an MBA [Master of Business Administration ] in Colombia, in the United States. We accept and a loan is granted. It includes the amount of the tuition and fee schedules common on 25 January 2013 in the form of a contract. This agreement is compulsory if the amount borrowed is greater than 1 500 euros and without interest. This is the case.

The contract is accepted by your client on February 13, 2013. In exchange, your client has agreed to become an associate of his return. He left in may 2013, the school runs until 2015. But on August 2, 2015, the employee that is expected to send a letter of resignation. He says that he will proceed with the reimbursement of the loan. Nothing happens. Then, from 26 October to 5 November 2015, it is still to repay the loan. It is an obligation. The company has even paid his tuition.”

The president: “The loan should be reimbursed in every case?”

The lawyer of the employer: “The contract provided for several alternatives. The employee was exempt the refund if he had graduated, he returned and took the position of associate for two years. The loan was repayable if he did not obtain a degree. And if he did not return, the loan amount was declining. He has signed it knowingly training to 58 000 dollars. The company has paid 100%. There has been no grant, no support by a training organization.

I was told that the amount is too high. It is reckless. It’s all the same to him, who had resigned. It is on the penalty clause training: the employee who resigns before a certain period of time must reimburse the expenses incurred by his employer.”

The president: “We are going to hear the other party, before discussing the grievances which are complained of.”

The lawyer of Charles: “I go back to the context. My client has been engaged as a consultant.”

The president: “We card!”

The lawyer of Charles: “He is 23 years old, this is his first job.”

The president: “What is the relationship with the loan?”

The lawyer of Charles: “It is the context. Two years later, the company offers a MBA program. My client has no choice. It is the policy of “up or down” (2). If he wants to rise in rank, it is necessary that it is changing. In February 2013 he has agreed to sign a loan contract, no amount, no time frame. It is in these conditions that he will sign the contract.”

The president: “Your opponent says that on his return he chose to resign.”

The lawyer of Charles: “returning in 2015, there is a radical change of activity. His business is resumed. There will be more board, he must give up many customers. The opportunities are not the same, then it chooses to leave the company. When you are young with a young child to support, and that there are opportunities, it is the only possible choice.”

STORY >> “I’m leaving, and the check is 100 000 euros!”

The president: “Your grievances?”

The lawyer of Charles: “It tells me that my client had knowledge of the amount to be refunded. But what role will his business enters into a loan with its employees? This is not a bank. Certainly, it can be done but it must be of a unique character. The second condition of the loan is to be “social”. You have case law on the financing of the vehicle or the financing of works in the main home, but nothing on training in a professional setting. If you are in a loan contract classic this is the article L 511-6 of the monetary and financial code, which shall apply.”

The president: “You lift the incompetence of the prud’hommes?”

The lawyer of Charles: “No.” But when you sign a contract on the future, one must have an idea of the amount to be reimbursed and this has not been done within the rules. The loan contract is not valid. “

The lawyer of the employer: “It is he who has chosen, he knew the amount. This criticism should not lead it. You tell me that all the repayment terms and conditions are not indicated, but if!”

The lawyer of Charles: “If you don’t have to hold back the personal loan, and go on the penalty clause-training here again I request the nullity.

The penalty clause-formation must obey four conditions: the first is that the funding of the training is solely the responsibility of the employer and such charges are brought to the knowledge of the employee. The non-respect of these criteria leads to the nullity. Second condition: the clause must provide for a rebate amount, a time. Nothing in this case. Third condition: the amount should be proportional to the costs incurred. It tells us nothing on this point. Fourth condition: it must not deprive the employee of his ability to resign.

he is made to pay today his resignation. How can we today argue the penalty clause-training? The only poor argument you have is that he was aware of and I have no room on this point, no explanation. The contract is void, regardless of the legal means that the board will choose. “

The president (counsel for the employer): “You have asked your employee to a repayment schedule?”

The lawyer of the employer: “Yeah, we offered him.”

RECIT >> “just a licensee, he wrote “Freedom” on Facebook with a photo of his cheque”

The advisor: “What fees have been paid and how? The year tuition was $ 58,000 and you ask for much more…”

The lawyer of the employer: “It was the appeal to the employer who paid and régularisait live in Colombia. Then, if the employer does not pay, it was he who was responsible for the payment. This situation is, of course, never presented, and you will see the exchange of emails on a tripartite basis. He had $ 2,000 per year for the ancillary equipment on bills, 2 $ 600 for her computer and her textbooks… ”

The president: “It has been 18 months?”

The lawyer of the employer: “No, 22. Almost two years of schooling.”

The president: “Where is it today?”

The lawyer of Charles: “He lives in New York and has worked for the caisse des dépôts et placement du Québec.”

The adviser: “He stayed in the USA?”

The lawyer of the employer: “He never came back.”

The president: “during this period there was a suspension of the contract? His salary also?”

The lawyer of the employer: “Yes. His contract and his salary had been suspended for 22 months, but he had accepted a promotion at his return.”

(1) The name was changed.

(2) “up or down”, “to progress or disappear”.

Read our complete file

“, 708 mails then it is off to burn-out” “The seller is lime nails in front of customers, she says harassed her!” “A perverse narcissist has taken it in the flu,”

was 15 hours. The president: “The debate is closed. Pronounced on the 8th of June.”

Verdict. The employee is sentenced to repay the sum of 102 838,16 euros to his ex-employer. He must also pay her 500 euros to article 700.

(1) The name was changed.

(2) “up or down”, “to progress or disappear”.