IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-04140724.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Le "risque judiciaire" et les licenciements en France: le point de vue de l’économie du risque

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Langlais

    (EconomiX - EconomiX - UPN - Université Paris Nanterre - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Le droit du licenciement expose-t-il les entreprises françaises à un "risque judiciaire"? L'article discute les arguments des différentes thèses (Blanchard et Tirole (2003), Cahuc et Kramarz (2004), Munoz-Perez et Serverin (2005)) en interprétant les informations empiriques disponibles relatives aux décisions des salariés (acceptation/contestation) et des entreprises (choix du motif de licenciement) à partir des instruments de l'économie du risque. Nous montrons que l'analyse des données relatives aux recours devant les Prud'Hommes suggère de la part des salariés une attitude nettement moins riscophobe (voire clairement riscophile) que celle habituellement révélée sur les marchés du risque. Par ailleurs, nous montrons que le licenciement pour motif personnel n'apparait comme systématiquement préférable au motif économique que dans la mesure où les entreprises sont supposées riscophobes. A l'inverse, la comparaison du coût anticipé d'un licenciement entre le motif économique et le motif personnel apparait très sensible aux hypothèses concernant l'ancienneté du salarié, le taux de rejet du salarié devant les Prud'Hommes, ou le coût indirect du licenciement.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Langlais, 2008. "Le "risque judiciaire" et les licenciements en France: le point de vue de l’économie du risque," Working Papers hal-04140724, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-04140724
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04140724
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04140724/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    2. Farmer, Amy & Pecorino, Paul, 2002. "Pretrial bargaining with self-serving bias and asymmetric information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 163-176, June.
    3. Farmer, Amy & Pecorino, Paul, 1994. "Pretrial negotiations with asymmetric information on risk preferences," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 273-281, September.
    4. Francis Kramarz & Marie-Laure Michaud, 2002. "The Shape of Hiring and Separation Costs," Working Papers 2002-38, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    5. Ichino, Andrea & Polo, Michele & Rettore, Enrico, 2003. "Are judges biased by labor market conditions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 913-944, October.
    6. Linda Babcock & George Loewenstein, 1997. "Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 109-126, Winter.
    7. Abowd, John M. & Kramarz, Francis, 2003. "The costs of hiring and separations," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 499-530, October.
    8. Farber, Henry S & Bazerman, Max H, 1987. "Why Is There Disagreement in Bargaining?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 347-352, May.
    9. Tversky, Amos & Wakker, Peter, 1995. "Risk Attitudes and Decision Weights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(6), pages 1255-1280, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric Langlais, 2008. "Le "risque judiciaire" et les licenciements en France : le point de vue de l’économie du risque," Cahiers du CEREFIGE 0807, CEREFIGE (Centre Europeen de Recherche en Economie Financiere et Gestion des Entreprises), Universite de Lorraine, revised 2008.
    2. Langlais, Eric, 2008. "Cognitive dissonance, risk aversion and the pretrial negotiation impasse," MPRA Paper 8844, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Éric Langlais, 2008. "Indemnisation des préjudices et fréquence des procès en présence d'une asymétrie d'information sur l'aversion au risque des parties," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 74(2), pages 191-218.
    4. Deffains, Bruno & Langlais, Eric, 2008. "Legal Interpretative Process and Litigants’ Cognitive Biases," MPRA Paper 14370, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Eric Langlais, 2008. "Asymmetric information, self-serving bias and the pretrial negotiation impasse," EconomiX Working Papers 2008-30, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    6. Eric Langlais, 2008. "Asymmetric information, self-serving bias and the pretrial negotiation impasse," Working Papers hal-04140725, HAL.
    7. Eric LANGLAIS, 2010. "An Analysis Of Bounded Rationality In Judicial Litigations The Case With Loss Disappointment Averse Plaintiffs," Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, ASERS Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 42-50.
    8. Bruno Deffains & Eric Langlais, 2009. "Legal Interpretative Process and Litigants’ Cognitive Biases," Working Papers hal-04140887, HAL.
    9. Farmer, Amy & Pecorino, Paul, 2004. "Pretrial settlement with fairness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 287-296, July.
    10. Idriss Fontaine, 2021. "Uncertainty and Labour Force Participation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(2), pages 437-471, April.
    11. Goerke, Laszlo & Neugart, Michael, 2015. "Lobbying and dismissal dispute resolution systems," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 50-62.
    12. Dennis Wesselbaum, 2014. "Firing tax vs severance payments – an unequal comparison," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 41(5), pages 721-736, September.
    13. Kocher, Martin G. & Krawczyk, Michal & van Winden, Frans, 2014. "‘Let me dream on!’ Anticipatory emotions and preference for timing in lotteries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 29-40.
    14. Enrico Diecidue & Peter Wakker & Marcel Zeelenberg, 2007. "Eliciting decision weights by adapting de Finetti’s betting-odds method to prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 179-199, June.
    15. Cahuc, Pierre & Malherbet, Franck & Prat, Julien, 2019. "The Detrimental Effect of Job Protection on Employment: Evidence from France," IZA Discussion Papers 12384, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Wulung Li & Ramachandran Natarajan & Yan Zhao & Kenneth Zheng, 2021. "The effect of management control mechanisms through risk-taking incentives on asymmetric cost behavior," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 219-243, January.
    17. Marcello Basili, 2006. "A Rational Decision Rule with Extreme Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1721-1728, December.
    18. Bassanini, Andrea & Garnero, Andrea, 2013. "Dismissal protection and worker flows in OECD countries: Evidence from cross-country/cross-industry data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 25-41.
    19. Alonso-Borrego, César & Fernández-Villaverde, Jesús & Galdon-Sanchez, Jose Enrique, 2004. "Evaluating Labor Market Reforms: A General Equilibrium Approach," IZA Discussion Papers 1129, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Nathalie Chappe & Raphaël Giraud, 2013. "Confidence, Optimism and Litigation: A Litigation Model under Ambiguity," Working Papers 2013-05, CRESE.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-04140724. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.