base 100% d'occupations

12:34 Feb 21, 2022 

If you're telling some hot-shot executive that s/he's not going to be working part-time, then that's kind of insulting to him/her.

However, telling him/her that she/he would get full pay for working full hours is merely a common-sense, factual statement.

The contract doesn't exist in a contextual void, is my point.

21:50 Feb 17, 2022 

We are indeed talking about working all the hours agreed to in the contract, as mentioned by Connor, but I think my answer is clear enough in the context.

100% = full-time work
<99% = short-time working where an employee's working hours are reduced

These links should help give a bit more info:

https://www.acas.org.uk/lay-offs-and-short-time-working

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/coronavirus-and-employment_pand...

16:37 Feb 17, 2022 

http://support.cresus.ch/manuels/cresus-salaires/taux-rappor...

Phil's link in his agree also uses the term "Taux d'occupation contractuel" and also calculates "occupation" as a percentage, based on hours worked:

"La durée hebdomadaire convenue est fixée à 40h.
Ce qui donne 40 x 12 = 2080h par année,
soit 2080 / 12 = 173.3h par mois.

L’employé a travaillé 75h ce mois.
Son taux d’occupation local est calculé à
75 x 100 / 173.3 = 43.28%"

So, it's a question of the percentage of hours worked out of the notional standard total, the assumption being that this should be 100%.

16:20 Feb 17, 2022 

Google search results that prove my point:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q="base 100 % d'occupations"...

16:19 Feb 17, 2022 

Other occurences of "base 100% d'occupations" on the internet, without or without the "s": 0. It has been pointed out here once or twice recently that Swiss French calques off Swiss German quite a lot, but there has been no explanation of that in this instance.

There are still a lot of questions to be answered here.

15:15 Feb 17, 2022 

I think the "s" on the end is wrong.