A bill to be debated in Parliament in the fall plans to reform the impact of crossingheadcount thresholds. It provides, inter alia, for harmonizing the method of calculation of the number of staff and granting a five-year period, once the staffing threshold has been reached, to meet the corresponding obligations. A number of obligations related to the threshold of 20 employees would be transferred to companies with more than 50 employees
Even if a situation of co-employment cannot be characterized, the tort of the parent company or the main shareholder can be engaged by the employees when the decisions of these authorities, taken at the expense of the interests of the subsidiary, have irreparably damaged its economic health and contributed to the loss of jobs. The Court of Cassation, which had already embarked on this course in 2014, recalls the principle and its limits in several judgments delivered on May 24, 2018
The government wishes to encourage employee savings plans in small and medium sized companies. Several measures in this respect will be announced shortly, such as the lifting of the forfait social on savings or profit-sharing for certain companies as well as the implementation of branch employee savings agreements that the employer can adhere to.
The French Supreme Court has handed down a much awaited ruling on the impact in French law on European case law that assimilated the daily commuting carried out by mobile workers between their residence and their first and last clients’ offices as working time. The Cour de cassation decided to strictly apply the French labour code’s text that expressly excludes considering such travel time as working time, especially in regards to remuneration.
The French government has announced a new plan on employee equality with stricter, more binding rules for companies. Among the measures announced is the creation of software to measure the wage gaps between men and women in the company. Nothing is set in stone yet. The legislative measures themselves will be announced in June of this year.
A company hired an employee as a part time cleaning lady. The company, however, greatly varied the employee’s working time without respecting the conditions set out by law. The employee obtained the re-characterization of her employment contract as a full time contract and the termination was at the fault of the employer. Indeed, only a collective agreement may provide for the possibility of varying or modifying the part time working time over the course of the year.
The Macron ordinances of September 23, 2017, which reform many areas of French labor law, only had until now a regulatory value. Since March 31, 2018, they have become part of the Labor Code and have acquired the status of law. Among the flagship measures are the increased importance of collective bargaining at a company level, the recourse to the collective mutually agreed terminations and the establishment of the CSE, the new and simplified staff representation body.
The works council must take a decision within a certain period when it is consulted on the strategic orientations. In the absence of an opinion within this period, he is deemed to have been consulted and to have given a negative opinion. But beware, the consultation period runs from the date when the works council has been able to make a decision by being sufficiently informed. Hence the importance of thoroughly informing and updating the database of each company, which includes all the information necessary for the works council consultations.
The rules for validating agreements by signing a majority of representative unions have been applicable since 1 January 2017 for all agreements on work hours, rest and holidays. The labor law had provided for a generalization of this majority requirement on 1 September 2019. The Macron reform has moved this implementation up to 1 May 2018.
An employer may impose a transfer of the employee whose contract includes a mobility clause. The French supreme court (Cour de cassation) verifies the validity of such a clause : in order to be valid, it must clearly define the geographic scope of its application. And yet, the Cour de cassation has just clarified that a mobility clause that covers all the company’s sites in France was sufficiently specific.