NewsletterNewsletter No. 202 – October 2025
DISMISSAL: Periods of contract suspension are included in the calculation of length of service for the purpose of determining compensation for dismissal without reel and serious cause
An employee, hired in May 2016 and placed on sick leave as of November 2016, was dismissed on economic grounds on 17 April 2019. She contested the grounds for termination, and her dismissal was reclassified as a dismissal without real and serious cause. The employer contested the employee’s claim for damages for dismissal without real and serious cause, arguing that she had not completed one year of service, as her employment contract had been suspended after six months of service. The French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation), however, held that “the employee had, with the periods of suspension of her employment contract due to illness being included, more than one year of seniority within the company” (Cass. Soc. 1st October 2025, No. 24-15.529).
MEAL VOUCHERS AND TELEWORK: Teleworking is not a valid reason to refuse granting meal vouchers
An employee performing his duties by telework brought an action before the Labor Court seeking payment of the employer’s contribution to meal vouchers, which he claimed he was entitled to. The employer contested this right on the ground that the employee was teleworking. The Cour de Cassation reaffirmed that a teleworker shall enjoy the same rights as an employee working on company premises (Article L. 1222-9 of the Labor Code) and that the granting of meal vouchers depends solely on the existence of a meal break within the employee’s daily working hours (Articles L. 3262-1 and R. 3262-3 of the Labor Code). It concluded that “the employer cannot refuse to grant this benefit to employees solely on the ground that they perform their duties by telework” (Cass. Soc. 8 October 2025, No. 24-12.373).
LIMITATION PERIODS: Actions seeking to annul a settlement agreement are subject to a five-year limitation period
In 2015, an employee and her employer entered into a settlement agreement to resolve a dispute concerning the performance of the employment contract. In 2018, the employee brought an action before the Labor Court seeking the annulment of the agreement. The employer raised a limitation defense, arguing that the two-year limitation period applicable to disputes relating to the performance of employment contracts should apply. The employee, however, argued that the five-year limitation period provided for in Article 2224 of the Civil Code was applicable. The Cour de Cassation upheld the latter position: “an action seeking the annulment of a settlement agreement that had resolved a dispute relating to the performance or termination of an employment contract constitutes a personal action and is subject to the limitation period of Article 2224 of the Civil Code” (Cass. Soc. 8 October 2025, No. 23-23.501).
UNFAIR DISMISSAL: The exceptional purchasing power bonus is payable to an employee whose dismissal is found to be without real and serious cause
After her dismissal for gross misconduct was reclassified as a dismissal without real and serious cause, an employee claimed payment of the exceptional purchasing power bonus. The employer, however, argued that, on the date of payment, the employee was no longer on the payroll and was therefore not entitled to the bonus. The Cour de Cassation rejected this reasoning based on Article 1304-3 of the Civil Code, according to which a suspensive condition is deemed fulfilled when its non-fulfilment results from the conduct of the party who had an interest in preventing it. The Court therefore held that the requirement of being on the payroll on the date of payment could not be invoked against the employee. This ruling appears transposable to the French “value-sharing bonus” (Cass. Soc. 24 September 2025, No. 23-22.844).
STAFF ELECTION: The resignation, during annulment proceedings, of an elected representative of the overrepresented gender does not entail their replacement
A trade union referred its case to the Judicial Court seeking the annulment of the election of three candidates of the overrepresented gender appearing on its list. During the proceedings, these elected representatives resigned in order to prevent annulment and thereby allow the application of alternate representation rules. The Cour de Cassation reiterated the mandatory nature of the rules relating to the balanced representation of women and men on electoral candidate lists, as well as the sanction for non-compliance with these rules, namely annulment. It concluded that the alternate representation rules “do not apply to the replacement by an alternate representative of a holder whose mandate is subject to annulment proceedings before the Judicial Court” (Cass. Soc. 15 October 2025, No. 24-60.159).
EMPLOYMENT OF SENIOR WORKERS: Employment of senior workers becomes a mandatory topic for collective bargaining within professional branches and certain companies
Law No. 2025-989 of 24 October 2025 transposing the national interprofessional agreements of 14 November 2024 aims to strengthen the promotion of employment of senior workers, notably through collective bargaining.
This reform establishes the employment of senior workers as a new mandatory topic for annual negotiations. Thus, at the level of professional branches, social partners are now required to initiate, at least every four years, negotiations relating to “the employment and work of experienced employees, with regard to their age.” Moreover, the law modifies the framework applicable to workforce planning and career management (known as GEPP). This topic, previously optional, becomes mandatory for companies with at least 300 employees, which must initiate specific four-yearly negotiations dedicated to the employment of senior workers (Law No. 2025-989 of 24 October 2025 transposing the national interprofessional agreements in favor of the employment of experienced employees and relating to the evolution of social dialogue).
EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVES: The limit of three consecutive terms for elected members of the CSE (i.e., Works Council) is abolished
The Macron Ordinances had introduced, in Article L. 2314-33 of the Labor Code, a limit of three consecutive terms for elected members of the CSE in companies with more than 50 employees. This restriction could, however, be waived by the pre-election agreement in companies with between 50 and 300 employees. Article 8 of Law No. 2025-959 of 24 October 2025 transposing the national interprofessional agreements of 14 November 2024 amends this provision by entirely abolishing the limitation. From now on, employee representatives may serve an unlimited number of consecutive terms within the CSE, regardless of the size of the company.