Woman sues employer after 20 years of being paid to do absolutely nothing

In a case that flips the fantasy of “getting paid to do nothing” on its head, 59-year-old Laurence Van Wassenhove is taking one of Europe’s biggest telecom companies, Orange, to court. She alleges that the company left her in a professional void for more than 20 years — full salary intact but with no tasks, no responsibilities, and virtually no human contact.

Speaking to French outlet FTV, Van Wassenhove described her experience as “forced inactivity” that left her “invisible” in the workplace.

From valued hire to workplace exile
Van Wassenhove joined Orange in 1993, when it was still France Télécom. After developing epilepsy and hemiplegia — partial paralysis on one side of the body — she was reassigned from her original role to a secretarial position, making use of her HR training.

But her career stalled in 2002 when she sought a transfer to another region. An occupational health review deemed her unfit for the proposed post, and she was instead placed on “standby,” marking the beginning of her decades-long professional limbo.

“I was paid, yes, but I was treated like I didn’t exist”
Despite her steady income, Van Wassenhove told Mediapart she faced financial struggles, eviction notices, and worsening mental health while caring for her autistic child. The isolation, she says, eroded her sense of purpose and left her battling severe depression.

Her lawyer, David Nabet-Martin, argues that Orange’s inaction deprived her of “having a place in society” as a disabled person, causing long-term psychological harm.

Company response and ongoing battle
Orange, speaking to French outlet La Dépêche, insisted it considered Van Wassenhove’s “personal social situation” and maintained the “best possible conditions” during her absence from active work. The company also claimed it had explored reintegrating her into a new role, though repeated sick leave meant it never happened.

Van Wassenhove first raised her concerns formally in 2015 with both the government and the High Authority for the Fight against Discrimination, but she claims little has changed. Early retirement was eventually suggested due to her disability — a prospect she saw as yet another push out of the working world.

While the idea of collecting a paycheck without lifting a finger might sound like the ultimate workplace perk, Van Wassenhove’s case paints a more complicated picture — one where prolonged inactivity can be just as damaging as overwork.

As she takes her fight to court, the outcome could spark new conversations about the intersection of disability, workplace inclusion, and what it truly means to “have a job.”