We publish today a letter sent by an employee of the President of the Republic, Mr Nicolas Sarkozy. It provides a clear summary of the case at bar .
" Paris, December 12, 2007
Mr. President,
Since September, 35 families live without resources, without jobs and without incorporation with no coverage, no aid possible since we are still seen in the eyes of the law as "employees".
I am writing to you on behalf of all my colleagues to challenge you and draw your attention to our plight.
Indeed, just days after the installation of Mr Dominique Baudis president of the Arab World Institute in Paris, In February 2007 he decided to break the contract for services in restaurants in the IMA with our former employer, the Company YARA-PRESTIGE 'notice until August 31 2007.
Faced with this uncertainty, Mr Baudis reassured us about our jobs we confirm that the Labour Code (Article L122-12) applies and the new operator will resume any employment contracts, as well as various letters and documents from the IMA recalled and confirmed.
Only on 1 October 2007 that the IMA told us signing the contract with Nour, while the latter had indeed been created under the name of the IMA-NOUR Monday, September 3, 2007 with reference to commencement of operations within the IMA itself and with its approval.
Mr. President, the minute I write, we still have not received our salaries due since September 1, 2007. And worse, the new operator precludes the application of the law.
It is obvious that we have exhausted all means in our possession to assert our rights, we warned the unions that helped us and the services of the Ministry of Labour, and we finally brought our case to the Board Industrial Tribunal for interim relief, in vain.
We certainly believe in justice, but we can not afford to wait years for court proceedings. We pay a high price mismanaged a case that raises many questions. Why
that speed and precipitation in the breaking of a contract without cause and without regard for its social and financial consequences?
Why this method is unclear and lacking transparency with which the call for applications was launched? This seems grossly lacking some elements, we note primarily the fact that negotiations linger between the IMA and the Company Nour on a subject not negotiable is the social aspect, not to mention that only the Nour was competing , where the question of the usefulness of a call for applications since the candidate is known and seems designated in advance. What we also clearly said Mr Baudis.
And finally, does it contract with the Company Nour is really interesting and beneficial financially for the IMA to sacrifice our rights and our jobs?
Indeed, the contract stipulates a million euro investment by the Company Nour. It also states that the IMA will reimburse the Company in March 2008 NOUR 300 000, 00 €. On 700 000, 00 € remaining, representing the true commitment of Nour in this case, 400 000, 00 € will be spent on the purchase of small equipment that will remain in the assets of the Company. It leaves only 300 000, 00 € real investment on behalf of IMA and not one million euros as announced with great fanfare by each other.
According to this contract, must pay NOUR 150 000, 00 € per year in rent over a period of ten years, a total of 1.5 million, 00 €. The financial contribution of Nour rises so after this period to 1.5 million, 00 + 300 000 €, 00 € originally invested a total of 1.8 million, 00 €. The deadweight loss of the IMA would be 1.2 million, 00 € in comparison with what the former claimant settled with 300 000, 00 € per year.
The generosity of the IMA does not stop there, he gave this company the right to use its logo, as forecourt parking and communication.
This case reflects in any case a serious injustice even more than the EPI does not condemn the actions of his new partner, worse still defends the courts nor the obligation to comply with the law of Furthermore we believe there is a void Contract.
Mr. President, if the economic interests of the IMA are not defended, and if our rights are violated, then what would the real motives of this whole affair?
Mr. President, you call out so that you can act with relevant officials in order to stop this injustice and finding the fastest ways to resolve this situation.
Counting on your understanding and your commitment, please accept Mr. Speaker, our most perfect consideration and our most respectful greetings. "
" Paris, December 12, 2007
Mr. President,
Since September, 35 families live without resources, without jobs and without incorporation with no coverage, no aid possible since we are still seen in the eyes of the law as "employees".
I am writing to you on behalf of all my colleagues to challenge you and draw your attention to our plight.
Indeed, just days after the installation of Mr Dominique Baudis president of the Arab World Institute in Paris, In February 2007 he decided to break the contract for services in restaurants in the IMA with our former employer, the Company YARA-PRESTIGE 'notice until August 31 2007.
Faced with this uncertainty, Mr Baudis reassured us about our jobs we confirm that the Labour Code (Article L122-12) applies and the new operator will resume any employment contracts, as well as various letters and documents from the IMA recalled and confirmed.
Only on 1 October 2007 that the IMA told us signing the contract with Nour, while the latter had indeed been created under the name of the IMA-NOUR Monday, September 3, 2007 with reference to commencement of operations within the IMA itself and with its approval.
Mr. President, the minute I write, we still have not received our salaries due since September 1, 2007. And worse, the new operator precludes the application of the law.
It is obvious that we have exhausted all means in our possession to assert our rights, we warned the unions that helped us and the services of the Ministry of Labour, and we finally brought our case to the Board Industrial Tribunal for interim relief, in vain.
We certainly believe in justice, but we can not afford to wait years for court proceedings. We pay a high price mismanaged a case that raises many questions. Why
that speed and precipitation in the breaking of a contract without cause and without regard for its social and financial consequences?
Why this method is unclear and lacking transparency with which the call for applications was launched? This seems grossly lacking some elements, we note primarily the fact that negotiations linger between the IMA and the Company Nour on a subject not negotiable is the social aspect, not to mention that only the Nour was competing , where the question of the usefulness of a call for applications since the candidate is known and seems designated in advance. What we also clearly said Mr Baudis.
And finally, does it contract with the Company Nour is really interesting and beneficial financially for the IMA to sacrifice our rights and our jobs?
Indeed, the contract stipulates a million euro investment by the Company Nour. It also states that the IMA will reimburse the Company in March 2008 NOUR 300 000, 00 €. On 700 000, 00 € remaining, representing the true commitment of Nour in this case, 400 000, 00 € will be spent on the purchase of small equipment that will remain in the assets of the Company. It leaves only 300 000, 00 € real investment on behalf of IMA and not one million euros as announced with great fanfare by each other.
According to this contract, must pay NOUR 150 000, 00 € per year in rent over a period of ten years, a total of 1.5 million, 00 €. The financial contribution of Nour rises so after this period to 1.5 million, 00 + 300 000 €, 00 € originally invested a total of 1.8 million, 00 €. The deadweight loss of the IMA would be 1.2 million, 00 € in comparison with what the former claimant settled with 300 000, 00 € per year.
The generosity of the IMA does not stop there, he gave this company the right to use its logo, as forecourt parking and communication.
This case reflects in any case a serious injustice even more than the EPI does not condemn the actions of his new partner, worse still defends the courts nor the obligation to comply with the law of Furthermore we believe there is a void Contract.
Mr. President, if the economic interests of the IMA are not defended, and if our rights are violated, then what would the real motives of this whole affair?
Mr. President, you call out so that you can act with relevant officials in order to stop this injustice and finding the fastest ways to resolve this situation.
Counting on your understanding and your commitment, please accept Mr. Speaker, our most perfect consideration and our most respectful greetings. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment