Suicide of a STMicroelectronics Crolles employee: all the members of 3 representative trade union organizations slam the door of the joint commission and CAD seized today the public prosecutor

“The 6 elected representatives of the CGT, CFDT and CAD unions on the joint committee would like to explain to the members of the CSE several difficulties they encountered during the work of the committee.

Initially, we deplored that the communication made with team 4 was very poorly organized and that, despite joint work, the management made the unilateral choice to delay and modify the content of the communication (mail presentation of the joint committee to the team 4).

There followed various problems of convocations and organization. We had to ask for an interview with the site director and president of the CSE to warn about the poor start of the commission and ask that he intervene to correct this.

To contact the employees identified within the scope of the survey, we were surprised to note that the management did not provide the personal email addresses of the employees or the telephone numbers of the consulting firm.

Consequently, several key people who were on sick leave, on sick leave, or even part of the company could not be contacted in this way. It was necessary for the union representatives of the commission to seek the contacts of the people so that they were received as part of the investigation.

In addition, some people identified in the immediate perimeter of the situation were either forgotten or not interviewed despite their wish to be heard.

In this same theme, we deplore that major witnesses (managers, RRH) who had an important role in the management of the situation, were not heard.

Regarding the summary document, we would like to tell you about the significant change made by the expert firm between the first and the second version of the latter. Indeed, a first summary document comprising elements of the testimonies collected, quite detailed, had been submitted to the committee and each member had been able to submit amendments.

After several discussions and despite a consensus sometimes found on certain points, we hoped that the cabinet would resume the turn of phrase to respect the debates and the requests of the various parts of the commission. We also wanted to record divergent analyzes between management and elected officials when there were any. Instead, it has, to our astonishment, completely revised its summary document. The expert transformed the initial report into a simple power point presentation, with a highly streamlined content, removing many of the elements reported and synthesized in the initial version.

Faced with this misunderstanding and with the aim of finding a consensus, the 4 OS (CFE-CGC, CFDT, CGT and CAD) decided to meet to make changes to the initial document drafted by the expertise firm (*). Despite still-present differences, we have reached an agreement to present a common version to management. The latter was obliged to return to the initial report to propose its own modifications.

During this commission, we were able to note a lack of involvement and significant delays in the return of the documents of the expert firm. We went to meetings several times without working documents. We even had to make our own documents and work on them in a joint committee.

For the recommendations, despite the substantial work of the members of the trade union organizations, the management put forward three points and to evoke a unilateral action plan, without discussion in committee and disdaining the recommendations of the members of the trade union organizations. We were able to note with regret, the lack of discussion on this point, and a clear will of the management to unilaterally make its action plan, which we consider very weak compared to the serious facts analyzed by the commission.

After several working meetings on the summary document with all the members of the committee, we, CFDT, CGT and CAD members collectively decided to end the work of the joint committee.

This decision was taken because the management requested an incalculable number of repetitions, modifications and transformations on the summary report. This had the effect of distorting the report as well as the collective restitutions of interview summaries that we had compiled and delaying the restitution of the report by several more weeks.

After several attempts at joint writing, it has become impossible for us to work and continue under these conditions.

To conclude, we would like to express to you with this declaration that it is out of respect for the testimonies and suffering collected, out of consideration for the seriousness of the situation, this having contributed to the suicide of an employee and also resulted in work stoppages, work accidents, that we left the commission and dissociated ourselves from the unilateral action plan envisaged by management. »