- 8 -
The Negotiations
Petitioner engaged counsel both in the United States and
France for advice as to his legal rights as a consequence of his
employment termination. His French attorney advised him that under
French law, in order to obtain recovery against Millipore, he would
have to institute a suit in France against Millipore, S.A. (French
law prohibited abusive dismissal or termination without cause, and
provided for compensatory damages for emotional distress,
indignity, humiliation, and injury to reputation. Such damages
were not taxable under French law.) Petitioner’s French counsel
informed petitioner that he had a bona fide claim under French law.
Additionally, petitioner was informed that potentially he had
legal rights under a French collective bargaining agreement
governing Millipore, S.A.’s managers and engineers (“convention
collective Ing�nieurs et Cadres de la M�tallurgie”), which applied
to Millipore employees in France as well as those transferred to
the United States.
Petitioner’s U.S. counsel informed petitioner that he had
several possible causes of action under Massachusetts law,
including invasion of privacy, defamation, negligent and
intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent firing.
On October 2, 1992, petitioner’s U.S. counsel wrote Mr.
Gilmartin formally rejecting Millipore’s termination offer, as set
forth in Mr. Gilmartin’s September 22, 1992, letter. In the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011