Employee Of French TV Station Fired For Criticizing Three Strikes Plan
from the yikes dept
I always thought that French labor laws made it quite difficult to get fired. I guess that's until you express your opinion that a "three strikes" law that would kick people off the internet is a bad idea. Yann brings to our attention a story about a guy who worked on the web side of giant French TV network TF1 and wrote his parliamentary representative an email from his personal gmail account, explaining why he thought a "three strikes" law was a bad idea. His rep, Francoise de Panafieu, who supports Sarkozy (members of the same party) apparently forwarded the letter to the French minister of culture (who is a major backer of the law), Christine Albanel, who then sent it back to the legal department at TF1... causing the guy to get fired (link in French, here's the Google translation). TF1 supposedly claimed that the reason for the dismissal was that it fully supported the law (though it had never made that position public, and as a news organization, was supposed to be impartial to the bill), claiming that it was in its own economic best interests to support "three strikes."Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: fired, france, three strikes
Companies: tf1
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
With a repersenative like that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
For fucks sake, we're a PROTESTANT country, if we have any religious affiliation at all, guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
Name me one PRO NAZI politician of national office in America in the last 30 years? Hell Ill even give you 50 years? While your at it, can you name the 175+ congress members (almost all of the senate and many house members) who attended AIPACs recent rally. I can find you many interviews where President Obama was repeatedly asked to pledge his undying allegiance and unending support for Israel . . . I don’t recall any such questions about the Vatican or national socialism? If you want to know who runs government, look at the lobbies and they dont get any bigger or more powerful then AIPAC. Sadly if they continue to exploit this influence on American foreign policy, I fear they will eventually face a backlash that will be counterproductive for Israel and the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
1. Senator Prescott Bush, one of seven directors of the Union Banking Corp., siezed in 1942 under charges of trading with the enemy
2. Every member of the Rockefeller family since 1940, and probably before. In '41, Standard Oil was found to have a corporate "marriage" w/IG Farben, a Pro-Nazi firm that produced the famed Zyklon-B gas, which was manufactured w/slave Jewish labor, amongst other things.
3. Too much information on the Ford Family to even begin to list here.
4. Allen Dulles administered Operation Paperclip, which brought the US half of plundered Nazi scientists (the other half going to the USSR). Most subsequently went to work for NASA, beginning the space race.
5. Sec. of State John Dulles, again too much to list, but you can start w/the fact that he provided the Nazi regime with nearly a billion dollars through the Sullivan & Cromwell firm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
I'll just take the first example, for fun:
2009 minus 50 = 1959. Prescott Bush serverd until 1964. None of the them are close to 50 years? I would disagree. Dulles was Sec. of State until '59, Alan Dulles was Director of the CIA until '61, and Rockefellers litter govt. to this day.
I don't have people telling me I'm wrong, but how do my answers not fall into the time scope of the request?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
Have you recently thought about getting a mac for your moonlighting gig? I hear they're pretty sweet, with Apple's Garage Band Software and all, you could probably clean up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
I'm sure there's an awesome insult in there somewhere, I'm just not getting it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
I don't think either controls us. But the erroneous reputation we have with the rest of the world is that we are beholden to Israel.
The US is certainly not beholden to the Vatican. That has not been alleged against us since Kennedy was in office nearly 50 years ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
I get frustrated w/some of the anti-Jewish stuff on here. You want to be anti-Israel? Cool, I understand. Anti-Jewish? Not so much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: deduct intelligence
I often find myself getting kicked and pushed out of the bed in the middle of the night by my wife for dreaming about sexy french women with whips and chains. Just like yourself, I tell her in the morning I was dreaming about the Revolutionary War. She doesn't believe me. But, that's what I get for marrying into a Russian family. **Sigh**
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: deduct intelligence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And here is the downside
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And here is the downside
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dismisal and th French
And, I don't think the French are a particularly stupid group; no more so than any other. But they do seem to have terrible luck with their governments. In the Revolution, the masses rose up and toppled (or de-topped) the reigning government. Maybe it's now time for a new revolution to make a government that is truly responsible to the people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dismisal and th French
The bigger problem is the e-mail was a private e-mail to the government, and then it was sent to TF1 from the government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dismisal and th French
ok Im getting tired of pointing this out but you have no such protection in the United States either, not from your employer. If you say things publicly that are counter productive to your employers interest, you are taking a risk of being fired, whether you live in France or America.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
If that was the case I would agree. The guy didn't go PUBLIC. Not like he got interviewed on TV, did a public blog post with his name out in the clear, wrote an op-ed piece, etc., he wrote to a representative about his viewpoint on an upcoming vote. That representative then totally abused their power and passed the letter on to his boss. While I'm sure a letter to a rep. is public, most would assume that your letter of viewpoint wouldn't be sent to your boss.
Freedom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dismisal and th French
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
No it wouldnt, all it needs to be is his superiors dont believe he is "on board" with the "direction" of the company . . . boom hes sacked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Dismisal and th French
In any event, constitutional rights like the First Amendment don't apply between pvt parties. Their application is limited to govt-citizen relations. Employers, other than govt employers, couldn't care less abt your civil rights, nor do they need to.
Moreover, with limited exceptions, govt records are public records. As such they're open for all to see, whereby it's not wrong for a govt employee to publicize or otherwise disseminate records or notes rec'd by govt to any member of the public, including an employer.
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dismisal and th French
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Speech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech?
"
They have the SAME basic FREE SPEECH protections we have here in America (I dont believe he was jailed or even proesecuted for his speech was he?). If you think that free speech extends to protections from your employer, go tell your boss to fuck off and see what happens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech?
Free speech means being able to express (in a civil manner) your opinion about anything. It has never meant being able to tell your boss to fuck off or yell "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater. Make some sense before you post something, will you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
I dont think so (depending on how they came about knowlege of your opinion). No Company in America has to employ people who do not believe in its mission or business model. They can if they want too, but the law is not going to force them too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
Every company in America has to be an equal opportunity employer regardless, if you have a Christian company that stats they are to follow god, they must higher a Jewish or Muslim interviewee if said person had the credentials for the position. Not giving them the job based on there religion IS against the law. Furthermore, one person’s opinion on a subject, even against company opinion, can not get one fired. There has to be other reasons such as performance or breach of company policy (which wouldn’t include difference of opinion). The company I am involved with is highly reliant on the car industry. They would like to see it thrive so that it can make money, I feel that they have dug there own grave. Those are a difference of opinions however they can not fire me because of it. I am protected by Free speech to think whatever I want to think and say.
As for this comment
“If you think that free speech extends to protections from your employer, go tell your boss to fuck off and see what happens”
This is about as dumb as a 3 winged bird tied to a kite trying to fly through a hurricane. You would not get fired because you do not have free speech, you would get fired for harassment! So this statement holds no water.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
Also, there is a Ministry in St. Louis who has a requirement that all employees and contractors be active in their respective church. What about atheists/agnostics? No protection under th law for those without faith?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
Your one good point, regarding at-will employment, is generally valid, however it is clear from the article that this person was targeted for his political ideology - that throws the at-will argument out the window. If they found out, never mentioned the letter and simply gave him notice, they might have had ground to stand on regarding at-will employment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Speech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thats what you get
for getting your information from Rush Limbaugh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thats what you get
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Thats what you get
Rush makes a living spreading xenophobic nonsense, much like Mikes opening sentence. That kind of statement is expected from someone like Limbaugh (and the rest of talk radios igno-rotti ) who seemingly doesn’t even make the smallest attempt to actually know anything about which he talks. However, one expects a little more from Techdirt, I think that’s what he was trying to say anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Thats what you get
Gotta love the Rush-hating Libs. Any more hate to spew?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thats what you get
Considering the guy you're defending, this statement is very ironic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Thats what you get
What? How the hell is Mike's opening statement xenophobic? He simply stated that their actions were totally the opposite of what he expected based upon his understanding of their laws. How is that xenophobic?
I like to challenge Mike as much as the next guy, but you're really pushing it here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Thats what you get
but that's beside the point....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thats what you get
Um. I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh in my life. But I do have a degree in Labor Relations, and took an entire class on European Labor Laws. But what do I know?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Thats what you get
Major Dittos.
LOL...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Thats what you get
Probably not much more than those who taught you! And remember the old saying about those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The "Registration" system, has killed any interesting discussion there. I am against registration not on priniciple, but depending on the site. This one definately does better without it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's pretty bad...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Damn Pussys!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
HIEL SPEELCHEK!!!
DIE GRAMMAR VON AMERICUNZ!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.frenchlaw.com/employment_law.htm
Not sure why the assumption was made that Rush has anything to do with the opening statement.
While French labor laws made it quite difficult to get fired may be a strong way of looking at it, most employees in the US are 'at will' and that is determined at the state level so when looking at a country that prohibits at will I can see the point of the statement without bringing windbags into the process
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
France.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Job loss is not important point.
The more important issue is the exposure of the relationship between the government and the business he had recently worked. The situation brings up all sorts of interesting questions:
- Why is he forwarding government mail to the business? I'm sure if the employee called and asked for copy of his bosses emails to the government he wouldn't get to far.
- How much time is this official wasting on the narrow issue.
- How is the official being compensated for his efforts on behave of the company.
- It seems that the officials actions indicate that even more dubious activities may be occurring is there any ethics/audit investigations planned.
Additionally, what if the employee had decided to bluff and claim didn't write the letter, it seems this representative is quite brazen in thinking his actions will go unexamined. It may even entice someone to set him up for mail fraud, libel, torty interference, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Opinions, opinions...
The guy will win a wrongful termination lawsuit, period. I bet my degree in Law over this one.
The government can also be sued since there was a breach of trust, but that's somewhat harder to pass. He can throw some more dirt on top of Sarkozy.
The French government is acting just like the true extremists they are. Even after removing the obvious connections between the govnt officials and major businesses you get an awesomely big soup of the usual curruption.
I'm an atheist, i try to keep imaginary mega wizards out of my life. Religions are based on dogmas which i believe... well, it sucks. Thinking for yourself should be a duty rather than a freedom, but that my extreme opinion, i just hate people trying to plant misinformed opinions on me, go figure...
And VRP... naw dude, just... naw...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Opinions, opinions...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(sorry for my english i'm in college and i'm not sure if all words are good :p)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
France does not have at-will employment. (Which sucks when you are young right out of college and can't prove you're worth a dime, but that is off topic) That guy most likely had a CDI which basically means he cannot be fire ever without gigantic benefits. Also, he will probably win a wrongful firing lawsuit which can order the company to rehire him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]