A discreet but potentially advantageous legislative change occurred in France on September 10, affecting millions of employees working 35 hours a week. This development could result in a salary increase for many workers. Discover the details of this modification and its concrete implications.
The 3 key points not to miss
- A ruling by the Court of Cassation adjusts French law to European law regarding the calculation of overtime hours.
- Paid leave and sick leave are now considered as actual working time for the calculation of overtime hours.
- Employees working 35 hours could see their pay increase thanks to this new legal interpretation.
New interpretation of the law on overtime hours
The Court of Cassation recently issued an opinion that aligns French law with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This opinion specifies that the calculation of overtime must include paid leave and sick leave as actual working time. Thus, employees do not lose the opportunity to receive specific financial benefits, even when they take leave.
Practical consequences for employees
In practical terms, an employee working 35 hours, who works overtime from Monday to Thursday and takes a day off on Friday, will now have these overtime hours considered. Previously, the employer could choose not to pay them, arguing that the employee had not reached the weekly threshold of 35 hours. This change represents a potential income increase for many workers, thus improving their purchasing power.
Purchasing power and working time
This legislative change is part of a logic where working time is directly linked to purchasing power. As a well-known saying goes, “time is money.” The ability to convert overtime into additional income could redefine the balance between work and pay for many French people.
Historical context of the 35-hour workweek law
The 35-hour workweek law, instituted in France in 1998 under the government of Lionel Jospin, aimed to reduce the legal weekly working hours to promote employment. It was implemented gradually and sparked many debates about its relevance and economic effects. Since its adoption, this law has been subject to several adjustments to respond to labor market changes and economic imperatives.