Paid leave taken into account when calculating overtime
From now on, paid leave days are treated as actual working time for the purposes of working-time accounting. They must therefore be included in the calculation of weekly overtime, as if they had been worked.
The Cour de cassation (French Supreme Court) aligns itself with European case law by counting overtime hours even where statutory paid leave has been taken (excluding RTT days, contractual rest days, leave for family events, etc.). The Court holds that: "an employee subject to a weekly accounting of working time may claim payment of overtime for the week during which he took a paid leave day and therefore did not complete 35 hours of actual work". The Cour de cassation thus sets aside Article L.3121-28 of the Labour Code. In this case, the employees concerned came under the Syntec collective agreement, modality 2.
It should be noted that this decision applies only to employees whose working time is accounted for on a weekly basis. This solution applies immediately to pending disputes. (CJEU, 13 January 2022, DS v Koch Personaldienstleistungen GmbH, C-514/20; Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 10 September 2025, no. 23-14.455)
Paid leave and sick leave: new rule on the carryover of leave
The Cour de cassation held, in a ruling of 10 September 2025, that sick leave suspends paid leave.
Again with a view to aligning with European case law, the Cour de cassation recognises the employee’s right to carry over paid leave where sick leave occurs during their paid leave and where they inform their employer. According to a clarification from the Ministry of Labour, the carryover of leave must be made within a period of fifteen months.
The Cour de cassation thus distinguishes: the purpose of paid leave, which is to allow the employee rest, relaxation and leisure, established as an essential principle of EU social law; and the purpose of sick leave, which is to allow the employee to recover.
Notification of the sick leave to the employer must be made in the usual forms and within the usual time limits. The High Court does not, however, provide any clarification on this point. Likewise, this decision raises many questions in payroll terms. (Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 10 September 2025, no. 23-22.732)
Dismissal void as based on acts of religious proselytism arising from private life
The Cour de cassation declares void the disciplinary dismissal of an employee who exercised her freedom of religion in the context of her private life.
In this case, an employee hired as an internal service agent in a child-protection association was sanctioned several times following acts of proselytism (religious singing, gifts of bibles, etc.), culminating in a dismissal for misconduct after she visited a resident of the association to give her a bible outside of her workplace and working hours.
The Court points out that a disciplinary dismissal cannot be based on facts pertaining to the employee’s private life, unless they constitute a breach of a professional obligation. In this instance, the Court held that the facts pertained to the employee’s private life, the latter having exercised her freedom of religion (a fundamental right), and did not constitute a breach of a professional obligation.
Judges may not re-characterise the ground chosen for the dismissal. Consequence: the objective disruption to the business (by nature non-disciplinary) cannot be raised in litigation if the employer dismissed for misconduct. (Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 10 September 2025, no. 23-22.722)
Compensation for a void trial period: no assimilation to the regime of void dismissal
In a ruling of 25 June 2025, the Cour de cassation specifies that "an employee whose termination of the trial period is void on discriminatory grounds cannot claim the compensation provided in the event of void dismissal but only the reparation of the damage resulting from the nullity of that termination."
In this case, the Court recalls that the legal regime of the trial period cannot be assimilated to that of dismissal. An employee whose trial period is found void may claim damages but cannot claim the compensation provided for void dismissal.
A further consequence: since the legal regime of void dismissal does not apply to the trial period, the employee cannot request reinstatement in the company. (Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 25 June 2025, no. 23-17.999, confirming the ruling of the Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 12 September 2018, no. 16-26.333)
No exercise of freedom of expression through a lawyer
The Cour de cassation rejects the reasoning of an employee who relied on her freedom of expression through her lawyer.
In this case, the employee had refused a proposed mutually agreed termination by means of a letter sent by her lawyer. Following this, the employer initiated dismissal proceedings. The employee argued that these proceedings infringed her freedom of expression, which she claimed to have exercised through her lawyer when refusing the mutually agreed termination as recorded in her lawyer’s letter. On this basis she sought a declaration that the dismissal was void.
The High Court emphasises that there is no infringement of freedom of expression, since the latter may only be exercised personally by the employee, and not through their lawyer.
A welcome clarification: the exercise of freedom of expression requires a personal and direct step on the part of the employee. (Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 10 September 2025, no. 24-12.595)
Installation and modification of a video surveillance system in the company
The installation of video surveillance systems is strictly governed and regulated. Indeed, employees cannot be filmed directly at their workstation, save in particular circumstances. Video surveillance must moreover be proportionate to the aim pursued.
Furthermore, an employer wishing to install a video surveillance system must consult the works council (CSE) and provide employees with individual information on the existence of a processing operation containing personal data concerning them. The information must be communicated before the installation of the system.
In this case, the CNIL imposed a fine of 100,000 € on a company that had installed surveillance cameras hidden in smoke detectors.
The authority points out that the company never proved the temporary nature of this installation, rendering unfair the processing of the data captured by these cameras. In addition, the system was only incorporated into the impact assessment after its installation. Faced with these breaches, the CNIL denounces a lack of safeguards to reconcile the objective pursued with respect for employees’ privacy, as well as a personal data breach.
Any modification or new installation of a video surveillance system must be brought to the attention of the works council (CSE) and the employees. (CNIL, restricted committee deliberation, 18 September 2025, no. SAN-2025-008)
Dismissal for gross misconduct: delivery of end-of-contract documents upon notification of the dismissal
The Cour de cassation recalls that, in the event of dismissal for gross misconduct, the employer must deliver the end-of-contract documents to the employee as soon as the termination occurs, the latter taking place at the time of notification of the dismissal (dispatch by the employer).
Indeed, if the employer is late in delivering the end-of-contract documents, the employee suffers a loss that must be compensated by the employer. The employer may therefore be ordered to pay damages for the late delivery of the documents.
Caution is required as regards the practice of sending the documents after notification of the dismissal for gross misconduct, in a separate mailing sometimes a few days apart. The dispatch of the end-of-contract documents must therefore be concomitant. (Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 3 September 2025, no. 24-16.546)
Macron scale: periods of sick leave must not be deducted from the employee’s length of service
The Cour de cassation recalls that an employee’s sick leave cannot be deducted from their length of service within a company for the purposes of calculating compensation for unfair dismissal. In this case, an employee was denied her claim for unfair dismissal compensation because she had been on sick leave and therefore had less than one year’s length of service in the company. The High Court overturned this decision, which contained a twofold error:
As regards periods of suspension: the Court notes that there is no need to deduct periods of sick leave from the employee’s length of service for the calculation of the scale applicable to them.
As regards the right to compensation: even if the length of service is less than one year, the employee is entitled to reparation in the event of unfair dismissal. The compensation must then be set by the judge according to their loss. (Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 1 October 2025, no. 24-15.529; Cour de cassation, Labour Chamber, 12 June 2024, no. 23-11.825)
Progress update on the pay transparency directive
Directive 2023/970 of 10 May 2023 on pay transparency, aimed at ensuring equal pay between women and men, must be incorporated into French law before 7 June 2026. The Ministry of Labour had initially planned a transposition bill for autumn 2025.
Progress update on the compliance of European Union Member States. The transposition of the pay transparency directive is underway at Belgian federal level. However, the Wallonia-Brussels Federation has taken the lead by being the first governmental entity in the EU to transpose the directive. The Czech Republic has completed the transposition process. For the Netherlands, transposition is postponed to January 2027. It is the first EU State to delay the entry into force of the directive.
2026 Social Security Financing Bill
The Social Security Financing Bill was tabled on 14 October 2025 before the National Assembly. These measures are under discussion in Parliament and may still change. At this stage, four important measures:
Increase in the employer contribution upon a mutually agreed termination or a retirement at the employer’s initiative. The contribution rate rising from 30 % to 40 %.
Introduction of an 8 % employer contribution on salary supplements (meal vouchers, holiday vouchers, gift vouchers or cultural activities financed by the works council, etc.).
End of the exemption from employee contributions for apprenticeship contracts concluded from 1 January 2026. Apprentices’ pay would be fully subject to employee contributions.
Introduction of a limited duration for initial sick leave. The cap will be set by decree. However, the Government provides that general practitioners will be able to prescribe an initial sick leave of a maximum duration of 15 days, with possible renewal. The doctor will be able to derogate from the cap by justifying, on the prescription of the leave, the patient’s situation and in light of the recommendations of the High Authority for Health.