{"id":5082,"date":"2019-06-12T09:52:24","date_gmt":"2019-06-12T07:52:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/?p=5082"},"modified":"2019-06-13T11:13:59","modified_gmt":"2019-06-13T09:13:59","slug":"hausse-du-plafond-de-lindemnite-pour-violation-du-statut-protecteur-du-rss","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/2019\/06\/12\/hausse-du-plafond-de-lindemnite-pour-violation-du-statut-protecteur-du-rss\/","title":{"rendered":"Hausse du plafond de l\u2019indemnit\u00e9 pour violation du statut protecteur du RSS"},"content":{"rendered":"<section class=\"wpb-content-wrapper\"><p>[vc_row bg_type=\u00a0\u00bbbg_color\u00a0\u00bb][vc_column parallax=\u00a0\u00bbcontent-moving\u00a0\u00bb][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner css=\u00a0\u00bb.vc_custom_1549897021118{padding-right: 80px !important;}\u00a0\u00bb][vc_separator color=\u00a0\u00bbcustom\u00a0\u00bb align=\u00a0\u00bbalign_left\u00a0\u00bb border_width=\u00a0\u00bb3&Prime; el_width=\u00a0\u00bb10&Prime; accent_color=\u00a0\u00bb#163e75&Prime;][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Jusqu\u2019\u00e0 maintenant, la Cour de cassation accordait au d\u00e9l\u00e9gu\u00e9 syndical licenci\u00e9 en violation de son statut protecteur (notamment pour d\u00e9faut de saisine de l\u2019inspecteur du travail), une indemnit\u00e9 \u00e9gale \u00e0 12 mois de salaire. Cette indemnisation se fondait sur les textes l\u00e9gaux pr\u00e9voyant une p\u00e9riode de protection de 12 mois \u00e0 l\u2019issue d\u2019un mandat syndical ayant dur\u00e9 au moins un an (Cass. Soc., 1er octobre 2003, n\u00b0 01-41418 ; Cass. Soc., 9 avril 2014, n\u00b0 12-23105).<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Bien que visant un repr\u00e9sentant de la section syndicale (RSS) et non un d\u00e9l\u00e9gu\u00e9 syndical (DS), un arr\u00eat r\u00e9cent de la Cour de cassation d\u00e9cide d\u2019alourdir la sanction \u00e0 l\u2019encontre des employeurs (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.legifrance.gouv.fr\/affichJuriJudi.do?oldAction=rechJuriJudi&amp;idTexte=JURITEXT000038507998&amp;fastReqId=215383922&amp;fastPos=1\">Cass. Soc., 15 mai 2019, n\u00b0 18-11036<\/a>).<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>[\/vc_column_text][vc_btn title=\u00a0\u00bbVoir la suite de l&rsquo;article (Extranet de l&rsquo;Unidis)\u00a0\u00bb style=\u00a0\u00bboutline\u00a0\u00bb color=\u00a0\u00bbprimary\u00a0\u00bb i_icon_fontawesome=\u00a0\u00bbfa fa-lock\u00a0\u00bb add_icon=\u00a0\u00bbtrue\u00a0\u00bb link=\u00a0\u00bburl:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unidis.fr%2Fextranet%2Fhausse-du-plafond-de-lindemnite-pour-violation-du-statut-protecteur-du-rss%2F||target:%20_blank|\u00a0\u00bb][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_empty_space height=\u00a0\u00bb60px\u00a0\u00bb][vc_separator color=\u00a0\u00bbcustom\u00a0\u00bb align=\u00a0\u00bbalign_left\u00a0\u00bb border_width=\u00a0\u00bb3&Prime; el_width=\u00a0\u00bb10&Prime; accent_color=\u00a0\u00bb#163e75&Prime;][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=\u00a0\u00bb5\/6&Prime;][vc_custom_heading text=\u00a0\u00bb\u00c0 lire aussi&#8230;\u00a0\u00bb use_theme_fonts=\u00a0\u00bbyes\u00a0\u00bb][vc_masonry_grid post_type=\u00a0\u00bbpost\u00a0\u00bb max_items=\u00a0\u00bb10&Prime; item=\u00a0\u00bb4821&Prime; grid_id=\u00a0\u00bbvc_gid:1560417207641-cc446b54-08d8-10&Prime; taxonomies=\u00a0\u00bb18&Prime;][\/vc_column][vc_column width=\u00a0\u00bb1\/6&Prime;][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n<\/section>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>[vc_row bg_type=\u00a0\u00bbbg_color\u00a0\u00bb][vc_column parallax=\u00a0\u00bbcontent-moving\u00a0\u00bb][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner css=\u00a0\u00bb.vc_custom_1549897021118{padding-right: 80px !important;}\u00a0\u00bb][vc_separator color=\u00a0\u00bbcustom\u00a0\u00bb align=\u00a0\u00bbalign_left\u00a0\u00bb border_width=\u00a0\u00bb3&Prime; el_width=\u00a0\u00bb10&Prime; accent_color=\u00a0\u00bb#163e75&Prime;][vc_column_text] Jusqu\u2019\u00e0 maintenant, la Cour de cassation accordait au d\u00e9l\u00e9gu\u00e9 syndical licenci\u00e9 en violation de son statut protecteur (notamment pour d\u00e9faut de saisine de l\u2019inspecteur du travail), une indemnit\u00e9 \u00e9gale [&#8230;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":4909,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5082"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5082"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5082\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5085,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5082\/revisions\/5085"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4909"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5082"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5082"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/unidis.fr\/portail\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5082"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}