FRANCE Industrial relations profile
| Index | << Prev | Next >> |
[ |
Industrial relations characteristics
Collective bargaining
|
National level (Intersectoral) |
Sectoral level |
Company level | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Principle or dominant level |
x |
||
|
Important but not dominant level |
x |
||
|
Existing level |
x |
The coverage rate of collective agreement is almost 98% (97.7% in 2004 according to a study by the DARES, compared to 93% in 1997). This is because the practice of extension of collective agreements to entire sectors of activity and/or to different geographical regions or other economic sectors is pervasive. The government can extend collective agreements at the request of one of the bargaining parties. Such extensions decided by a public authority have been used in different sectors to level advantages given to workers and to avoid competition on social matters (same minimum wages for all companies in a sector for example). These extensions historically showed their efficiency in improving working conditions. They prevent distortions of competition; indeed they guarantee that employers who are not member of an employer organisation cannot escape the social obligations requested from their competitors and achieve a competitive advantage at the detriment of employees. As a consequence, even companies that are not members of the signing employer organisations, or of any organisation at all, are covered by a sectoral agreement once it has been extended by the government.
However, the high coverage rate masks deficiencies. Many collective agreements are outdated. And few issues are actually covered: most of the negotiations concern wages and there are many overlapping areas (Report on collective bargaining and professional sectors, 2009).
Collective agreements are legally binding if legal conditions are fulfilled. National and sectoral agreements are legally binding for all employers who are members of the signatory employer organisation and if the firm belongs to the geographical and professional scope of the agreement. If the agreement is extended, the condition of belonging to the signing employer organisation does not apply. Even if a collective agreement is not legally binding (due to the fact that the employer does not belong to the signatory employer organisation), an employer can nevertheless apply it voluntarily. Conversely, specific ‘opt-out’ clauses have been introduced, allowing the employers not to have to implement the regulation. This has taken place particularly in the implementation of the European Directive 2003/88/EC on working time, concerning specific sectors that have to deal with the ‘duty hours’ (time on standby). More generally, the law (since 1982) authorised the conclusion of derogating agreements (at sectoral or company level). The law may be residual (non-peremptory legislation). It requires an express statutory authorisation. This capability has been developed by reforms in 2004 and 2008. It is mainly used in the organisation of working time (now, collective agreements may affect overtime, or the maximum hours of work). The law on ‘simplification of the law’ (published on 23 March 2012) eliminates the need for individual employees’ consent when the modulation of working time is established by collective agreement.
Negotiations can be carried out at all levels of economic activity. The original structure of bargaining was clearly pyramidal, with legislative regulation playing a pivotal role. Coordination between the different levels used to be organised on the ‘principle of favourability’ towards the employees (‘principe de faveur’); that is, in case of conflict between agreements, the one most favourable to employees applies. As long as legislative principles were respected, the decentralised levels had more autonomy to negotiate wages and working time and more flexibility in general issues concerning the relationship between employer and worker.
The overall construction has been significantly modified from the mid 2000.
The ‘Fillon law’ of 4 May 2004 on social dialogue (FR0404105F) aimed at injecting a new dynamism into collective bargaining; it introduced two major innovations: collective agreements must essentially have the support of (or not be opposed by) a majority of representative trade unions or of unions representing a majority of employees in order to be valid; while the previous hierarchy of collectively agreed norms is changed, with the possibility of company-level agreements departing from sector-level agreements (except in relation to four themes set out in the law). This new regulation contributes to the main trend of decentralisation of collective bargaining.
Moreover, the Act of 20 August 2008 amended the conditions of validity of a collective agreement, asking for two cumulative conditions. First, collective agreements have to be signed by one or more representative trade unions which received at least 30% of the votes cast in workplace elections; secondly they should not be opposed by a majority unions.
Other issues in collective agreements
In 2010, several agreements were signed, on harassment and violence at work (FR1006011I) and on the management of social consequences of the economic crisis on employment (19 May). An agreement was signed on March 25 2011 on unemployment insurance. One of the major themes of the ongoing intersectoral bargaining concerns the ‘competitiveness-employment agreements’.
The number of agreements on vocational training has increased significantly in 2011 (Report on collective bargaining, 2011) (266 agreements against 166 in 2010, see FR1207011I), probably as a result of the 2009 law on ‘guidance and vocational training throughout life’, which reformed the financing of training (Law 1437 of 24 November 2009).
The French parliament decided that the collective bargaining process would be the best tool to reach equality between men and women, especially regarding the reduction of wage differentials at company and branch levels. In 2006 the law of 23 March 2006 reinforced the duty to bargain. However, the Report on collective bargaining for 2010 (p.24) demonstrates that few sectoral agreements have been signed, despite the legal obligation to negotiate on this issue. A 2010 law introduced a system of financial penalties for companies with no agreement or action plan on the issue (Law-1330 of 19 November 2010). French companies that have not taken steps to close the pay gap between women and men through a collective agreement or unilateral action plan may be fined up to 1% of their payroll costs from 1 January 2012 (FR1112011I). In 2011 the quality, and the number, of sectoral agreements increased. The financial penalty has been a very strong incentive to negotiate an agreement in this field: there was an increase of 49% in new agreements from 2010 to 2011 according to the Report on collective bargaining, 2011.
Industrial disputes
The proportion of firms who report having had one or more collective disputes rose sharply in 2010 (+2.2% compared to 2009), especially in large companies (more than 500 employees). From May 2010, the pension reform sparked a massive social movement (nine days of national mobilisation) (FR1012011I). The number of individual days not worked because of a strike has greatly increased: it rose from 136 to 316 days per 1,000 employees from 2009 to 2010 (collective Bargaining Report, 2011). Two sectors were particularly affected: transport and industry.
Although there is little legislation on strikes, there are elaborate procedures for settling disputes, but these procedures are rarely used in practice.
Tripartite concertation
Several paths exist allowing for at least tripartite discussion.
First of all there is a national tripartite body through which employer and trade union confederations can hope to influence government policymaking as they are purely consultative: the Environmental, Economic and Social Council (Conseil économique, social et environmental, CESE). The CESE comprises representatives of employer and trade union confederations, as well as other interest groups such as consumers, and experts nominated by the government. CESE appears to be a body through which the government explains and informs employers and trade unions about its policies, rather than a body with whom a genuine consensus is sought.
Secondly, the social partners continue to be heavily involved in the management of certain social security provisions, such as public health insurance, unemployment benefits and social welfare boards. The social partners also play a central role in the supplementary private health insurance system (mutuelles) and pension plans. They are involved in the system of vocational training. The national system of policy concertation is complemented by a tripartite social dialogue in development at the regional or local level.
Furthermore, a 2007 law (Law 2007-130 of 31 January, 2007, on modernisation of social dialogue) makes it obligatory to consult national-level representatives of trade unions and employer organisations beforehand when proposing reforms in the field of industrial relations, employment and vocational training (FR0704039I). The government should provide these organisations with a policy document presenting the ‘diagnoses, objectives and principal options’ of the proposed reform. The social partners will then be able to indicate whether they intend to embark on negotiations and how much time they need in order to reach an agreement. This procedure will not apply in ‘emergency situations’; in such cases, the government would have to justify its decision, which can be legally challenged.
When drawing up a draft law following the consultation procedure, the government is not obliged to adopt the content of a collective agreement as it is. However, depending on the issue at hand, it must submit the bill to:
- the National Collective Bargaining Commission (Commission nationale de la négociation collective, CNNC) for reforms concerning industrial relations;
- the Higher Employment Committee (Comité supérieur de l’emploi, CSE) for reforms in relation to employment;
- the National Council for Lifelong Vocational Training (Conseil national de la formation professionnelle tout au long de la vie, CNFPTLV) for reforms with regard to training.
The social partners that are represented in these bodies have therefore the possibility of assessing whether or not the government’s proposals are in line with the relevant collective agreement and, if necessary, to give their opinion.
Workplace representation
In France, employees are represented through trade union and structures directly elected by all workers. Institution of worker’s representation is obligatory since 1945 at all workplaces with more than 11 or 50 employees (for a complete presentation, Milan Jevtic, The role of works councils and trade Unions in representing interests of the employees in EU member states, 2012).
Trade Union
Since 1968, trade union rights have been recognised in companies and trade unions have been entitled to appoint shop stewards (délégués syndicaux – Labour Code Articles L2143-1 to L2146-2), who have the power to negotiate and sign collective agreements at company level – a power the other worker representation bodies do not have if there is at least one shop steward. Since the reform of representativeness in 2008, unions not recognised as representative in an undertaking, can appoint a ‘representative of the union’ (‘représentant de la section syndicale’ – RSS – Labour Code Articles L2142-1-1 to L2142-1-4) who receives similar rights as the appointed shop steward except the right to negotiate collective agreements.
In the last survey REPONSE (2004–2005), 62.9% of the undertakings with more than 50 employees had a least one union steward. The study shows an increase: 57.8% of undertakings had at least one Union steward in 1998–1999, up from 54% in 1992–1993. An explanation is that the legal framework increased the role of negotiations at the level of undertaking. For example, to reduce the working time with state support or to create system of financial participation for employees, employers have to sign a collective agreement with trade unions.
Works Council
The council is a legal entity, which, as a collegial body, is composed of members elected by the employees and members of the management of the company, as well as of representatives nominated by the unions. Works councils have to be set up in private sector companies with more than 50 employees; they can be formed at either company (comité d’entreprise – Labour Code Article L2321-1) or establishment level (comité d’établissement). Works councils receive information from employers on issues such as the economic and social aspects of the company and new technology. They also respond to formal consultations by employers on topics such as redundancies and vocational training (without formal negotiation power), and are responsible for managing social and cultural activities, for which they have a budget (0.2% of the company’s annual pay-roll) (Labour Code Articles L2323-1 to L2323-5).
If the employer has fewer than 200 workers it can decide to establish, after consultation with staff representatives, a single body (Délégation unique du personnel –DUP, Labour Code Article L2326-1 to L2326-3). This does not replace the Works Council but assimilates both the CE and DP under one body, which performs the tasks of both by those elected.
In a group of companies, a group-level works council can be created (comité de groupe – Labour Code ( Articles L2331-1 to L2335-1), which enjoy similar rights to those of ordinary works councils.
In a multi-establishment company, works councils also form a central works council (comité central d’entreprise – CCE – Labour Code Article L2327-1 to L2327-14) which covers establishment works councils (comité d’établissement – Labour Code Articles L2327-15 to L2327-19)
Company with a European dimension can create a European Works Council (‘Comité d’entreprise européen’ – CEE – Labour Code Articles L2341-1 to L2346-1) which can be merged, according to the Labour Code, with the group-level works council, if employees’ representatives agreed.
In the survey REPONSE (2004–2005), 46% of the undertakings with more than 20 employees had a works council (‘comité d’entreprise‘, ‘comité d’établissement’ or a ‘délégation unique du personnel’), against 44% in 1998–1999. 96 per cent of undertakings with more than 500 employees have a works council or a single body, the rate decreases to 26% for companies having between 20 and 49 employees.
Health and Safety committee
In the private sector, a separate committee deals with health and safety issues (Comité d’hygiène, de santé et des conditions de travail – CHSCT – Labour Code Articles L4611-1 to L4611-7). In the public sector, since the reform of 2011, the former Health and Safety Committees (‘comité d’hygiène et de sécurité’) have become ‘Health and safety and working conditions committees’ (Comité d’hygiène, de santé et des conditions de travail – CHSCT). They are no longer a joint committee and only staff representatives have the right to vote. They should be set up in establishment with more than 50 employees
Workers’ delegate
The ‘workers’ delegates’ (délégués du personnel – Labour Code Article L2311-1) should be elected by all workers in all private sector establishments with more than 10 employees and are responsible for presenting individual and collective grievances to management and ensuring the implementation of legislation and collective agreements (Labour Code Articles L2313-1 to L2313-12). SME’s with fewer than 11 employees have no legal requirement to create an information-consultation body or to launch an election for workplace representative, however the decision create it can be take by collective agreement. In the survey REPONSE (2004–2005), 87% of the undertakings with more than 50 employees had a least one workers’ delegate. The study shows a continuous rise: 80.2% of undertakings had at least one Union steward in 1998–1999, up from 73% in 1992-1993. Conversely, the rate decreased to 63% in companies that have between 20 and 49 employees (against 57% in 1998–1999). Over 90% of companies with more than 100 employees had workers’ delegates in 2004–2005.
Technical Committees
Information and consultation (I&C) bodies also exist in the public sector, but their organisation is different to that in the private sector. The main consultative bodies within the public services are the Technical Committees that can be created on four levels: ministerial technical committee (‘comités techniques ministériels’), proximity technical committees (‘comités techniques de proximité’), common or single technical committees (‘Comités techniques uniques, Comités techniques communs’) or specific technical committees (‘comités techniques spéciaux’). The reform of collective bargaining in the public sector brought about by the law of July 2011 alters the way trade unions’ representativeness is assessed in the public sector, in line with regulations already in place in the private sector since 2008. Since this legislation, workplace elections determine the extent to which trade unions are involved in negotiations, can sign agreements and hold seats on tripartite advisory bodies.
The technical committee has different competences depending on the civil service divisions it belongs to; national civil service, public hospitals and local government. Within the national civil service (Fonction publique de l’État), the technical committee is responsible for individual and collective claims, work organisation and working conditions and there is an ad hoc Health and Safety committee. At local government level (Fonction publique territoriale), the technical committee is competent in issues from both working conditions and health and safety areas, as aspecific health and safety committee does not exist.
In the public hospital sector (Fonction publique hospitalière), competences are divided among two types of bodies: the ‘establishment technical committees’ (comité technique d’établissement), responsible for individual and collective claims and work organisation, and the health and safety committee, covering both health and safety and working conditions issues.
The regulation of these bodies is mainly organised by law. Nevertheless, there is room for regulation through collective negotiation as the social partners can create I&C bodies by collective agreement, to improve information and consultation within the company. They may negotiate improvements in facilities for employee representatives (more paid time-off, increase in resources etc.), or adapt I&C bodies to the company’s organisation, on a permanent basis such as setting up a works council for each business unit, or on a temporary basis, for example ad-hoc works councils in the event of a merger between two companies.
|
Works council type (WC) |
Trade union (TU) |
[Other body] Please specify, if needed | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Most important body |
Works council –Comité d’entreprise (CE) |
Shop steward- Délégué syndical (DS) |
Workers’ delegate (Délégues du personnel-DP) Health and Safety committee (Comité d’hygiène, de sécurité et des conditions de travail- CHSCT) |
| 2 Alternative body |
Single body- Délégation unique du personnel (DUP) |
Union representative Représentant de la section syndicale (RSS) |
Single body- Délégation unique du personnel (DUP) |
Employee’s rights
Labour law issues and individual litigations are, at the first level, brought before an industrial tribunal named ‘Conseil de prud’hommes’ (Council of wisemen), composed of non-professional judges, elected every five years. Appeals, when permitted (refused when the financial interest is low), are lodged before the ‘Cour d’appel’ (Court of appeal). Then appeals against the latter are filed to the ‘Cour de cassation’ (Judiciary Supreme Court).
Collective litigations are brought to the ordinary civil court: ‘Tribunal de Grande Instance (TGI)’ (for social plans, interpretation of collective agreements, functioning of the employees’ representatives, strikes). But the ‘Tribunal d’Instance (TI)’ is also the responsible body for litigations concerning the workplace elections (to check the candidacies or the regularity of the elections).
French labour law has punitive aspects (illegal work, infringement of security, discrimination, sexual harassment…), so criminal courts can be competent (‘Tribunal de Police’, ‘Tribunal correctionnel’).
The commercial courts deals in particular with conflicts concerning insolvency (to declare redundancies on economic ground for example).
Finally, the Tribunal of Social Security Affairs (‘Tribunal des Affaires de Sécurité sociale’) deals with the general litigations of social security.
Labour inspectorates
The Labour inspectorate is an administrative division under the Minister for Labour (767 labour inspectors in 2009, 1423 controllers, see report 2009), organised at regional level (in the ‘DIRECCTE -Direction régionale des entreprises, de la concurrence, de la consommation, du travail et de l'emploi’- Regional Business, competition, consumption, labour and employment direction). It monitors and enforces the application of social legislation, encompassing provisions deriving from collective agreements. In addition to this main role, it also performs advisory and information functions, has responsibilities in the settlement of disputes and possesses certain decision-making powers, particularly in matters where the law stipulates prior administrative authorisation for a private initiative (e.g. dismissal of an employee representative and, between 1975 and 1986, redundancies).
Useful? Interesting? Tell us what you think.