The direction from Amazon indicates this Monday, May 4, that she had make a request for Partial unemployment for six sites, or about 10,000 people, which was unsuccessful
. The Ministry of Labor confirmed that it had received a request Thursday
and refused it, without further details.
> Follow here our live from Monday, May 4 on the coronavirus pandemic
The recent decision of the Versailles Court of Appeal obviously had an impact on our activity in France […]. In this context, we have also requested assistance, as other companies in France have benefited.
, Amazon management said in an email.
Warehouses closed until Tuesday, May 5 included
Amazon was ordered by the Versailles Court of Appeal to carry out a risk assessment related to the coronavirus crisis with the employee representatives and to reduce its activity by then under penalty of € 100,000 per violation found. The group preferred close its warehouses until May 5 inclusive.
Indeed, our logistics activity is technically complex and the penalty of 100,000 € per offense, specified by the court of appeal, could imply that even a tiny rate of accidental treatment of unauthorized products, of the order of 0 , 1%, could result in a penalty of over a billion euros per week
, explained management.
Unfortunately, this risk means that we had no choice but to temporarily suspend the activity of our French distribution centers while we assess the best way to operate in light of the court’s decision.
, she added.
Unions consider Amazon demand “indecent”
The CGT, CFDT and SUD unions of Amazon France have proposed to management a gradual resumption of activity.
In a press release, they describe properly indecent
Amazon’s partial unemployment claim. They point out that this system was put in place to help employees of companies whose activity is made impossible during the period, such as catering or non-essential businesses
.
Furthermore, Amazon has chosen to temporarily close its warehouses since April 16, while continuing its activity from those in Europe, to better avoid two successive court decisions
, they are indignant.
– .
