Feb 7, 2011 11:20
13 yrs ago
2 viewers *
français term

sans départ contraint de l'entreprise

français vers anglais Affaires / Finance Entreprise / commerce
Afin de mieux répondre aux nouvelles exigences de ses clients, l'organisation de la Direction de l'immobilier d'Aéroports de Paris a été revue. Les modifications qui en découlent concernent principalement les métiers de la maintenance immobilière et se concrétiseront essentiellement par des reclassements internes, sans départ contraint de l'entreprise.

Discussion

joehlindsay Feb 7, 2011:
Interesting observations.
rkillings Feb 7, 2011:
The word used to have that blue-collar connotation in the US, too, but it's now long gone.
With the headline-grabbing redundancies in the UK now occurring at the NHS and in the City of London, the euphemism seesm to be going out of style:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/labour-hits-at-pounds-300m...
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/business/City--layoffs-...
Tony M Feb 7, 2011:
Yes, but... ...the term 'lay-off' is indeed used in the UK, but has traditionally had a slightly different meaning; during my lifetime, I've seen the word 'redundancy' (euphemism?) brought in to replace it in certain contexts; at first, and still to some extent, 'lay-off' had a connotation of blue-collar workers, the sort of people who might be paid weekly, and who might be laid off and taken on again as and when more work came in.

Redundancy, on the other hand, seems (to me, at least, empirically) to have been coined especially to apply to monthy salaried white-collar workers, and does imply a definitive departure; presumably 'redundant' places the emphasis on the fact that the position occupied has become superfluous, rather than on the idea of getting rid of the person.

Later, we got to down-sizing...

It's for this reason that I think the term lay-off is probably better avoided for a UK readership, unless one wishes to express it from a labour market / trades union POV, for example.
rkillings Feb 7, 2011:
No 'layoffs' in the UK? It may well be that redundancies, when they occur in *Britain*, are not called layoffs (or 'lay-offs'), but by now readers of the British press must be used to seeing that word when they occur elsewhere. (Sample: '"We have no layoff plans at Air France, and we have no layoff plans at KLM," Mr Spinetta told a news conference." www.guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 September 2003. Similar results at telegraph.co.uk, dailymail.co.uk, independent.co.uk -- but not thetimes.co.uk. :-))
I wasn't going to mention the more international ft.com site, but I couldn't resist this one by Lucy Kellaway, December 12 2010:
"Because it’s almost Christmas, I’ve decided to focus on two things that are always popular at this time of year. Layoffs and stand-up rows."

Proposed translations

+7
38 minutes
Selected

with no compulsory redundancies

or 'without the need to resort to...'

I think this is the term we'd use in the UK at least

Seems to me the FR is a bit of a euphemism for 'licenciement économique', non ?
Peer comment(s):

agree Mehdi Caps : Yes, a euphemism.
26 minutes
Thanks, MehdiCaps!
agree B D Finch : Not really a euphemism: no compulsory redundancies is generally an important trade union demand in such circumstances. Of course, the detail of the internal redeployment is another matter.
34 minutes
Thanks, Barbara! I only meant a euphemism on the FR side ;-)
agree Evans (X)
1 heure
Thanks, Gilla!
agree AllegroTrans
1 heure
Thanks, A/T!
agree Philippa Smith
2 heures
Thanks, Philippa!
agree joehlindsay : With the very important caveat that this is for UK readership. 'Redundancies' is not used in the US, layoffs is.
2 heures
Thanks, Joe! ANsolutely! I'd kind of assumed that as Asker is this side of the Pond... and didn't specify AE / BE
agree Kiwiland Bear : For what it's worth, the same wording is used in Australia & NZ. Layoffs are used too but not in this combination (and not that often).
6 heures
Thanks, KB! I think the trouble is, 'lay-off' has traditionally had another, slightly different meaning in the UK, so better to keep it separate.
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Selected automatically based on peer agreement."
+1
7 minutes

without forcing anyone out of the company

Not as elegant as the French but it appears to be common wording.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 mins (2011-02-07 11:30:05 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Alternately, "without requiring any layoffs/redundancies" (don't know if your target is US, UK, etc.)
Peer comment(s):

agree cc in nyc : with no layoffs (US English)
3 heures
Something went wrong...
+3
18 minutes

without imposing layoffs from the company

another suggestion

"The goal of the program was to reduce Ford's workforce without imposing layoffs and to provide its employees with an incentive to resign voluntarily."
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1420079.html

"They’ve helped reduce the borough workforce by 15 percent without imposing layoffs."
http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2010/10/south_plainfi...
Peer comment(s):

agree cc in nyc : with no layoffs (US English)
2 heures
thank you
agree joehlindsay : Jayoffs for US, redundancies for Britain.
3 heures
thank you
agree rkillings : with no layoffs.
8 heures
thank you
Something went wrong...
+1
3 heures

without forced departures from the company

Although layoffs/redundancies is ultimately what they mean, I think if they meant exactly that, they would have said licenciement instead of 'départ'. Just a little nuance of difference. 'Forced departures; is commonly used in English, and includes layoffs or maybe just not renewing contracts, which some may or may not consider technically 'layoffs/redundancies'.
Peer comment(s):

agree cc in nyc
1 heure
Something went wrong...
15 heures

without layoffs

Because I've never seen a voluntary layoff.
Something went wrong...
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Recherche par terme
  • Travaux
  • Forums
  • Multiple search