MovieChat Forums > Deux jours, une nuit (2014) Discussion > So, what would you do?

So, what would you do?

posted 10 years ago by PoppyTransfusion
27 replies | jump to latest

In a similar situation where you have to vote for a bonus (and don't forget the additional overtime hours) or to keep the job of your colleague who has been off sick for a while?

For me it would depend on the strength of my relationship with the colleague versus how much I'd invested in the idea of the bonus money. I like that the film shows both those for her and for the bonus and the varying different responses to her dilemma and her confronting them with it. I was sorry that Jean-Marc, the bullying foreman, appeared briefly at the end because he was played by Olivier Gourmet who is one of my favourite actors.

I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.

[–] Fran_Kubelick 10 years ago

I guess I would say no to the bonus, also to show the bosses I could not be bought so cheaply. Of course, also because you feel much better if you show some solidarity.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

I think the moral dilemma appears simple: You get a bonus or your colleague keeps their job. When posed starkly I think, and hope, most would chose to vote for their colleague to keep their job. The context of the dilemma in the film is more complex; the workers are low-earners and a few of them are shown to be struggling financially. In addition their colleague has been off sick for a while and it's suggested that she might not be strong enough to return. So she seems to be written off, almost. She too is struggling financially and part of her motivation to get well and resume work is financial. The context makes the dilemma harder. Was it Hicham who said the bonus represented one year's payment for utility bills? He was the one who was shown to be working a second job for cash in hand. For him to vote for his colleague would be at some expense to his family. Others seem to have flimsier needs for the money but given none of them were wealthy and most seemed to have a plan for the money, the bonus was not a frivolous matter.

The boss was a bastard right to the last. It would be important to show that one couldn't be bought but it's not so easy when you have little money and struggle financially. I think the Dardennes brothers have presented a very difficult dilemma.

I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.

[–] withnail69 9 years ago

You're not thinking French enough. You'd all take the bonus trust me.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

@withnail69

They're not French.

I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.

[–] Squeeth2 9 years ago

What fooquer said that?

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

[–] Fran_Kubelick 9 years ago

I disagree - not all colleagues were struggling financially, not even Sandra. This was not the point. They all had large, nice houses and cars, and as Sandra said about her own family, they wanted to keep their lifestyle - living in their own house and so on. Might be that her colleague working in the store really needed the extra money.

And seriously, would you say: I would like you to get the bonus, but sorry, you are not able to manage it... This is really arrogant.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

not all colleagues were struggling financially

If you read what I have written you'll see that I never stated all of them were struggling financially.

They all had large, nice houses and cars

No they didn't. Three of them were in flats/apartments. We don't see how the homes were furnished. Some of the employees we never see at home to judge their housing. We see hardly any of them with cars - so we don't know if they have cars or not. Two who we see with cars, the father and son, we don't see where they live to know if they have 'large, nice houses'. You may wish to disagree with me but please stick with what is seen in the film when making your point and don't invent what is not seen.

Sandra never said she wanted to keep their lifestyle either. The issue was having a mortgage and as we see she suggested to their husband that they could return to 'social housing' if she lost her job. He didn't want to. The spouses of the employees played a large role in the employees' voting choices.

I would like you to get the bonus, but sorry, you are not able to manage it... This is really arrogant.

None of them said this in the film and I never suggested they would say or think it. My point was this is context and important context, else why did the script introduce it, to how their decisions may be influenced; an influence that would probably be subconscious.

I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.

[–] Fran_Kubelick 9 years ago

I would like you to get the bonus, but sorry, you are not able to manage it... This is really arrogant.

None of them said this in the film and I never suggested they would say or think it. My point was this is context and important context, else why did the script introduce it, to how their decisions may be influenced; an influence that would probably be subconscious.

In fact, Hicham and Julien tell Sandra that she might not be up to her job when she is trying to persuade them.

And sorry, I don't get your point. If you say you did not suggest this, what else opinion where you expressing in your post?

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

My post made a number of points so I'm not sure which one you're referring to. If it's to do with this statement of yours: I would like you to get the bonus, but sorry, you are not able to manage it. This is another instance of you putting words into and onto my post that were not there.

I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.

[–] Fran_Kubelick 9 years ago

This is another instance of you putting words into and onto my post that were not there.

What are you talking about?

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] gothic_a666 9 years ago

Remember the "bonus" was not a "bonus", it was overtime pay.

The employees worked overtime, earning overtime pay. The employer decided to give them a separate paycheck comprising the overtime pay.

This separate paycheck was called a "bonus", but it was not really a "bonus", it was overtime pay for overtime work.

I think this is an important point that I admit I missed at first. If it were a "bonus" it would have been much easier for the co-workers to choose Sandra but the fact is they are entitled to being rewarded for their work. It adds a layer of complexity to the issue.

Also, it shows how underhanded the whole situation is. The co-workers should never even be in the position of making such a decision, forcing them to make such a choice is just as unfair to them as the whole thing is to Sandra.

As to what I would do, I am not sure but those who opted for the money should keep in mind that next time it might very well be them. The kind of system that sacked Sandra would gladly do the same thing to any of the other workers.

[–] cthulhulurks 9 years ago

Wow utilities come cheaply in the land of belgium

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

And quit she did after she'd been through a process that helped her recover and, presumably, helped some of her co-workers who voted for the bonus initially but who were unhappy with their decision.

Your comments on the politics are apposite and make me see the final scene between Sandra and Dumont (we never learn his first name ...) differently. He 'knew' that what she had done, by persuading half of the workers to vote for her in the second ballot, would change things between him and his work force. His henchman, Jean-Marc*, was discredited so Dumont was left exposed. Had Sandra taken his offer, he would have 'won' by showing money mattered more than relationships and morals and that Sandra would turn on those, like Alphonse, who supported her. Very clever final scene.

*One of my gripes with the film is that Olivier Gourmet was not in this enough.

I give my respect to those who have earned it; to everyone else, I'm civil.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mothnm 9 years ago

Hate to admit it but it would depend on 1. whether we were friends 2. if I thought her sickness warranted all the time off (this would be the least important factor since you cannot return to work until the doctor says you can) and 3. if she carried her weight when she was on the job. The third, pulling her share of the load, is essential. If I thought she was dead weight and not even friendly I will take the bonus, thanks.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

Hate to admit it but it would depend on

I think it would for many and your qualifications seem sound to me.

A bird sings and the mountain's silence deepens.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cthulhulurks 9 years ago

Were those blue collar members of a trade union? Withholding overtime pay and making a union worker hostage of the situation would constitute a malicious intent.

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

[–] Skibidido 9 years ago

It depends on my relationship with the colleague and how well Im doing with the economy. I've had co-workers I wouldnt save for a nickle. But if I think its a decent person and I've no moneyproblems, then sure Id vote for this person.

[–] anangelaway 9 years ago

Solidarity all the way, I'd say NO to bonus without a doubt.

[–] trisul 9 years ago

Bonus or job for the colleague?

All those with some humanity remaining would help their fellow worker, the rest have just lost their way, have been blinded by fear.

[–] Sook-Yongsheng 9 years ago

I'd like to think I would bite the bullet and vote for Cotillard's character to stay.

After all, maybe that workplace environment wouldn't have been so good to stay in. I might be looking for another job myself.

So what the hell? Do the noble thing and vote for her to stay.

It Follows: 8.5
Whiplash: 9
'71: 8.5
Two Days, One Night: 9