172.31 LPERS-VD

CH-VD

Art. 59 LOI sur le personnel de l'Etat de Vaud (LPers-VD) - b) Après le temps d'essai

Chapitre VI

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (75 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 59 LPers-VD · b) Après le temps d'essai

1. Sauf accord différent, le collaborateur ou l'autorité d'engagement peut résilier le contrat moyennant un préavis d'un mois pour la fin d'un mois la première année et de trois mois pour la fin d'un mois dès la deuxième année.

2. Le Conseil d'Etat peut convenir de délais plus longs et de modalités de départ particulières pour certaines catégories de fonction.

3. Sous réserve des cas d'application des articles 61 et 63, l'autorité d'engagement ne peut résilier le contrat qu'après avoir notifié un avertissement par écrit. Un règlement précise la procédure. L'autorité d'engagement motive la résiliation par

a. la violation des devoirs légaux ou contractuels;

b. l'inaptitude avérée;

c. la disparition durable des conditions d'engagement fixées dans un texte normatif ou dans le contrat de travail.

← Art. 58 LPers-VD sur le personnel de l'Etat de Vaud (LPers-VD) - Buts Art. 60 LPers-VD →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (12)

Jug.2022.475 · vd (art. 59 al. 1er et 3 LPers-VD)

Public Employee v. State: Admissibility of Appeal Challenging Official Warning Despite Expiration of Deadline During Judicial Recess

Cited in relation to the subsequent immediate termination, used to determine the continuing interest in challenging the prior warning.

Jug.2022.474 · vd (art. 59 LPers-VD)

Police Officer Disciplinary Warning Upheld After Criminal Conviction for Excessive Force

The court confirmed the warning issued in application of this article.

Jug.2021.271 · vd (Art. 59 al. 3 lit. a) LPers-VD)

Employee Warning Annulled for Disproportionate Disciplinary Action

This provision was cited in the reasoning (IV) as the basis for finding that the employee violated her duties by her behaviour, even though the final order ultimately annulled the warning.

Jug.2021.271 · vd (art. 59 al. 3 LPers-VD)

Employee Warning Annulled for Disproportionate Disciplinary Action

Cited in the reasoning (II.a) regarding the conditions under which the employer can terminate a contract, which requires a prior warning.

Jug.2021.158 · vd (art. 59 al. 3 let. b LPers-VD)

Employee Dismissal Upheld Due to Proven Incompetence and Failure to Adapt

This article was the legal basis for the defendant's decision to dismiss the plaintiff for proven incompetence.

HC.2019.941 · vd (Art. 59 al. 3 LPers-VD)

Cantonal Administration v. Employee Regarding Lawful Dismissal for Dereliction of Duty

This provision was cited in the dismissal letter (point 4.f) and served as the legal basis for the termination, which the Court upheld in its final orders.

Jug.2019.238 · vd (art. 59 al. 3 LPers-VD)

Chancery Chief Termination Upheld for Persistent Dereliction of Duty

Cited as the legal basis for upholding the dismissal due to violation of duties and proven unfitness.

Jug.2015.284 · vd (art. 59 al. 3 lettre a LPers-VD)

Employee Termination Appeal Following Workplace Dispute and Insubordination Finding

The court found the dismissal to be based on the violation of legal or contractual duties, as cited in the final order.

HC.2012.438 · vd (Art. 59 LPers-VD)

Wrongful Termination Due to Inadmissible Electronic Surveillance Evidence

This provision defines the grounds for ordinary termination, used here to determine the notice period that would have applied if the termination had been ordinary (relevant for calculating the compensation under Art. 337c CO).

HC.2012.361 · vd (Art. 59 LPers-VD)

Employee v. State Employer: Unjustified Immediate Dismissal for Misappropriation

This article, outlining the grounds for termination, was referenced in the discussion concerning whether the employee's actions constituted a violation of duties, even though the main conclusion was that the termination was unjustified under Art. 61 LPers-VD.

HC.2010.578 · vd (Art. 59 al. 3 LPers-VD)

Employee Misconduct and Disciplinary Action Appeal

Cited in the reasoning section as the rule requiring a written warning before contract termination, justifying the context of the decision being reviewed (the warning itself).

Jug.2024.538 · vd (art. 59 al. 1 LPers-VD)

Teacher Dismissal Over Vulgar Language Ruled Unjustified

Used to determine the notice period length (3 months) for calculating the compensation under art. 337c al. 1 CO, as per case law.