On Tuesday October 24, three former employees of the FFT contacted the Paris industrial tribunal. According to our information, they are contesting their dismissal for “professional insufficiency” and have made “related requests”. They were dismissed at the start of 2023. They will appear before the conciliation and orientation office at the end of January. Its primary role is to reconcile the parties, that is to say, to negotiate. He immediately proceeds to judgment when a party does not appear. When it has not been possible to reach an agreement, the conciliation and guidance office refers the file to the adjudication office. Who makes a decision.
The management of general director Caroline Flaissier in question
Still according to our information, two of these employees had contacted the CSE of the FFT with alert procedures for moral harassment directed against the general director, Caroline Flaissier. The conclusions were presented to them orally on February 28 by the HR director and a member of the CSE. At the end of the internal investigation, it appeared that the situation of moral harassment was not characterized, any more than that of an “attack on the rights of individuals, their physical and mental health and safety”.
It was explained to employees that “Caroline Flaissier’s management could be described as frank and direct”, “based on the culture of feedback which breaks with some of the usual codes of the FFT, which could generate of incomprehension.” However, in an opinion delivered on June 28, 2023, the Committee on Ethics, Professional Conduct, Prevention and Treatment of Conflicts of Interest questioned respect for “the impartiality of their members, their bodies and the decisions taken “. In this document, we can read that “certainly, the general director of the FFT was at no time associated with the procedure. Nevertheless, the latter being the subject of the alert, the conduct of the investigation by two employees of the Federation, one of whom occupies management functions under his immediate hierarchical authority, questions at the very least the appearance of impartiality of the procedure carried out”.
Thus, “the Ethics Committee considers that the FFT would benefit from strengthening its internal procedures by allowing in this case the use of an external body providing assistance in the conduct of investigations, the choice of this third party and its methodology being be done by mutual agreement”.
Contacted, “the FFT intends to recall that these three ex-employees, who are today trying to artificially make common cause by applying together to the industrial tribunal, were dismissed on different dates and for completely separate reasons. Therefore, to the extent that: on the one hand, the dismissal of these employees was perfectly legal and justified, on the other hand, the courts have now been seized, the FFT will reserve its explanations for the Industrial Tribunal.
