Facts
On August 1, 1985, the R. S.A. architecture firm hired Ms. [P.] as a drafter. On February 6, 1990, Ms. [P.] informed her employer that she was pregnant and did not intend to return to work after giving birth. The parties agreed that the employment contract would be terminated on July 31, 1990. However, on July 27, 1990, Ms. [P.] informed her employer that she no longer considered the February 6, 1990 agreement to be valid, as she had just discovered that she was entitled to paid maternity leave under the collective employment contract.
On August 31, 1990, Ms. [P.] sued R. S.A. for payment of 14,000 francs, representing her salary for three months after deductions for legal withholdings, as well as a share of the gratification. The Labor Court of X. condemned the defendant to pay the plaintiff 12,000 francs. The Court of Appeal of the Vaud Cantonal Court rejected the appeal filed against this judgment by the defendant.
R. S.A. filed an appeal with the Federal Court, which admitted the appeal, annulled the contested decision, and rejected the claim.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the validity of the contract termination agreement concluded between the parties on February 6, 1990. It considered that art. 336c al. 1 let. c CO did not prevent the parties from conventionally terminating the employment contract for a term falling during the employee's pregnancy, as the worker remains free to give notice during the aforementioned period.
The Federal Court also examined whether the agreement of February 6, 1990 did not conflict with the imperative provision of art. 341 al. 1 CO, which prevents the worker from waiving, during the duration of the contract and during the month following its termination, claims resulting from imperative provisions of the law or a collective contract. It considered that the contract terminating the contract for the end of July 1990 did not violate art. 341 al. 1 CO, as the plaintiff had not waived any…