normes de droit

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, Novethic propose un billet bien intéressant sur la place des salariés dans la gouvernance d’entreprise : « Donner plus de pouvoirs aux salariés pour prévenir les crises industrielles ».

Libérer la parole des salariés dans l’entreprise permettrait de mieux prévenir les crises environnementales et sanitaires qui mettent en danger les consommateurs, la planète et la réputation des entreprises. C’est l’avis de Philippe Martinez, numéro 1 de la CGT, qui s’exprimait le 15 janvier au micro de France Inter, à l’occasion de l’affaire Lactalis.

Donner plus de parole et de pouvoirs aux salariés au sein de l’entreprise est l’un des points abordés dans la grande réflexion en cours sur la réforme de l’entreprise dans le cadre du projet de loi Pacte . C’est ce qu’on appelle la codétermination, soit le renforcement de la présence des salariés aux conseils d’administration et de surveillance des entreprises.

De nombreux syndicats, chefs d’entreprise, universitaires et politiques se font les chantres d’une codétermination à la française, qui concernerait non plus seulement les très grandes entreprises mais aussi des grandes PME et les entreprises cotées.

Rappelons que la loi PACTE visant à réformer le modèle des entreprises prévoit de mieux associer les salariés aux fruits de la croissance en développant notamment des dispositifs d’épargne salariale, d’intéressement et de participation des salariés notamment dans les PME. Les salariés seront également mis en avant dans les CA. Jusque-là, dans la loi, les entreprises disposant d’un conseil d’administration, devaient nommer au moins un administrateur salarié. La loi leur en imposera désormais 2 à partir de 8 administrateurs. C’est moins ce que préconisait le rapport Notat/Senard rendu à l’hiver 2018.

À la prochaine…

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, je vous renvoie à cet article intitulé : « Corporate governance: ’employee voice’ and workplace reporting » (17 août 2018). Cet article revient sur les récentes évolutions britanniques touchant le code de gouvernance du FRC et le droit des sociétés en matière de reporting.

Some of the most eye-catching changes apply to listed companies, but there are also new requirements for many unlisted companies.

The changes are introduced through different sources, including the latest UK Corporate Governance Code (‘the Code’) and amended corporate reporting law and regulations. Different elements also apply to different types of company. Action will be required by heads of HR departments, company secretaries, in-house counsel and boards themselves.

The revised rules will apply for financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2019, so the first affected reports will be those published in 2020. However, companies should not wait until drafting those reports to engage with the reforms. Instead, they should be implemented early in the first affected financial year, if not before.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, la sénatrice Élisabeth Warren vient d’introduire un projet de loi très ambitieux (!) : le S.3348 – Accountable Capitalism Act.

Plusieurs points saillants ressortent de ce projet :

• La création d’un Office of United States Corporations.
• La possibilité de s’enregistrer auprès de cet organisme fédéral (alors que jusqu’à maintenant, rappelons-le, l’enregistrement se faisait auprès des États et notamment celui du Delaware).
• Les salariés représenteraient 40 % du CA.
• L’entreprise devrait poursuivre une mission sociétale.
• La redéfintion des devoirs des administrateurs et hauts-dirigeants.

Pour en savoir plus, lire cet article ici du The Guardian.

Extrait du projet de loi

SEC. 5. Responsibilities of United States corporations.

(a) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) GENERAL PUBLIC BENEFIT.—The term “general public benefit” means a material positive impact on society resulting from the business and operations of a United States corporation, when taken as a whole. (…)

(1) IN GENERAL.—The charter of a large entity that is filed with the Office shall state that the entity is a United States corporation.

(2) CORPORATE PURPOSES.—A United States corporation shall have the purpose of creating a general public benefit, which shall be—

(A) identified in the charter of the United States corporation; and

(B) in addition to the purpose of the United States corporation under the articles of incorporation in the State in which the United States corporation is incorporated, if applicable.

(c) Standard of conduct for directors and officers.—

(c) Standard of conduct for directors and officers.—

(1) CONSIDERATION OF INTERESTS.—In discharging the duties of their respective positions, and in considering the best interests of a United States corporation, the board of directors, committees of the board of directors, and individual directors of a United States corporation—

(A) shall manage or direct the business and affairs of the United States corporation in a manner that—

(i) seeks to create a general public benefit; and

(ii) balances the pecuniary interests of the shareholders of the United States corporation with the best interests of persons that are materially affected by the conduct of the United States corporation; and

(B) in carrying out subparagraph (A)—

(i) shall consider the effects of any action or inaction on—

(I) the shareholders of the United States corporation;

(II) the employees and workforce of—

(aa) the United States corporation;

(bb) the subsidiaries of the United States corporation; and

(cc) the suppliers of the United States corporation;

(III) the interests of customers and subsidiaries of the United States corporation as beneficiaries of the general public benefit purpose of the United States corporation;

(IV) community and societal factors, including those of each community in which offices or facilities of the United States corporation, subsidiaries of the United States corporation, or suppliers of the United States corporation are located;

(V) the local and global environment;

(VI) the short-term and long-term interests of the United States corporation, including—

(aa) benefits that may accrue to the United States corporation from the long-term plans of the United States corporation; and

(bb) the possibility that those interests may be best served by the continued independence of the United States corporation; and

(VII) the ability of the United States corporation to accomplish the general public benefit purpose of the United States corporation;

(ii) may consider—

(I) other pertinent factors; or

(II) the interests of any other group that are identified in the articles of incorporation in the State in which the United States corporation is incorporated, if applicable; and

(iii) shall not be required to give priority to a particular interest or factor described in clause (i) or (ii) over any other interest or factor.

(2) STANDARD OF CONDUCT FOR OFFICERS.—Each officer of a United States corporation shall balance and consider the interests and factors described in paragraph (1)(B)(i) in the manner described in paragraph (1)(B)(iii) if—

(A) the officer has discretion to act with respect to a matter; and

(B) it reasonably appears to the officer that the matter may have a material effect on the creation by the United States corporation of a general public benefit identified in the charter of the United States corporation.

(3) EXONERATION FROM PERSONAL LIABILITY.—Except as provided in the charter of a United States corporation, neither a director nor an officer of a United States corporation may be held personally liable for monetary damages for—

(A) any action or inaction in the course of performing the duties of a director under paragraph (1) or an officer under paragraph (2), as applicable, if the director or officer was not interested with respect to the action or inaction; or

(B) the failure of the United States corporation to pursue or create a general public benefit. (…)

(d) Right of action.—

(1) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY OF CORPORATION.—A United States corporation shall not be liable for monetary damages under this section for any failure of the United States corporation to pursue or create a general public benefit.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

En voilà une nouvelle ! Selon Me Sarah Fitzpatrick de Miller Thomson LLP, la Colombie-Britannique a déposé un projet de loi visant à introduire une Benefit corporation dans la province de la Colombie-Britannique : « B.C. Considers Benefit Corporations » (27 juin 2018).

British Columbia may become the first province in Canada to pass legislation that provides for the creation of « benefit corporations. » Benefit corporations are different from the typical for-profit business corporation in that they must be mandated to conduct business for the purpose of creating a general public benefit. They must also adhere to a certain level of accountability and transparency.  Benefit corporations started as a « B Corp » certification issued by B Lab, a non-profit headquartered in Pennsylvania. B Lab then prepared model legislation for U.S. States to adopt, officially authorizing corporations to conduct business for a public benefit purpose and allowing directors to act in the best interest of the public.  Currently, 33 U.S. States and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that officially authorizes benefit corporations.

Bill M 216 proposes to amend the B.C. Business Corporations Act (the « Act ») to create benefit companies. The bill is a private members’ bill, which passed second reading on May 17, 2018. As it has passed both first and second reading (which is rare), it is expected that Bill M 216 will receive enough support to pass third reading and be enacted into law.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian