Getting paid for 20 years without doing much at work might seem like a dream — but for Laurence Van Wassenhove, it was far from one.
Behind the steady paychecks lay a life marked by enforced invisibility, corporate indifference, and two decades of isolation that, she says, severely damaged her mental health. The question is whether this was an act of misguided compassion or a deliberate method to push a disabled employee out without formally firing her.
To many, receiving a salary without performing regular duties might sound ideal. For 59-year-old Van Wassenhove, however, it was anything but. She is now suing telecom giant Orange, alleging “forced inactivity” and claiming the company rendered her “invisible” for more than 20 years.
Van Wassenhove began working for the company in 1993, when it was still France Télécom. Soon after, she developed epilepsy and hemiplegia — paralysis affecting one side of her body — which made her original position impossible to continue. She was reassigned to a secretarial role, using her training as an HR assistant.
But what started as a reasonable accommodation soon became, in her words, a career dead-end. In 2002, she requested a transfer to another region, but an occupational health assessment deemed her unfit for the role. From that point, she was placed on indefinite standby.
The following years left her feeling like “an outcast secretary,” a situation she says took a heavy toll on her mental health. “I was paid, yes, but I was treated like I didn’t exist,” she told Mediapart. In 2015, she filed complaints with both the French government and the High Authority for the Fight Against Discrimination, but she claims little changed.
“Being paid, at home, not working is not a privilege. It’s very hard to bear,” she explained.
Her lawyer, David Nabet-Martin, contends that the prolonged isolation led to depression and other mental health struggles, arguing that Van Wassenhove was denied “a place in society” as a person with disabilities.
Orange responded to the 2024 case via La Dépêche, stating it had considered her “personal social situation” and tried to ensure the best conditions possible given her health. The company added that she had been lined up for a return to work in a new role — a plan that ultimately never materialized due to frequent sick leave.
Conclusion:
The story of Laurence Van Wassenhove highlights the delicate balance between accommodating an employee’s health needs and unintentionally sidelining them into invisibility. While Orange maintains it acted considerately, Van Wassenhove argues that two decades of enforced inactivity stripped her of purpose, dignity, and social connection.
Her lawsuit could set an important precedent in French labor law regarding long-term workplace isolation, particularly for employees with disabilities.