Forfait-jours: between a formal framework and effective monitoring, the bar remains high for employers
Cass. soc., 11 March 2026, n° 24-22.163
A fresh illustration of the complexity of the forfait-jours: between a formal framework and effective monitoring, the bar remains high for employers.
The French Supreme Court reiterates that the employer must ensure regular monitoring of the workload, making it possible to step in promptly when the workload becomes incompatible with a reasonable amount of working time.
Here, the Court finds that the employer does not establish that it ensured effective monitoring of the workload.
What existed:
annual meetings held in 2016, 2017 and 2018, in accordance with the applicable collective agreement;
the workload being raised in those meetings;
the existence of minutes evidencing this partial monitoring.
What was missing:
no annual meetings in 2019 and 2020;
no measures to ensure control over the span (amplitude) of working hours and monitoring of the workload;
no monitoring of compliance with daily and weekly rest periods;
no response to the employee's alerts about a "very heavy" workload and a "need for reinforcement" during the 2016, 2017 and 2018 meetings;
no measure whatsoever to address the workload, even though it had been identified and acknowledged as "very heavy" by management.
It is this combination that the court of appeal, upheld by the French Supreme Court, relies on to characterize a breach in the performance of the forfait-jours agreement.
The consequences are severe: on the one hand, the unenforceability of the forfait-jours gives rise to a right to overtime pay; on the other hand, the employer's breaches, being sufficiently serious, justify the judicial termination (résiliation judiciaire) of the employment contract attributable to the employer, with the effects of an unfair dismissal.
The decision confirms that compliance with the forfait-jours cannot be inferred solely from the existence of tools or occasional meetings, but from continuous, documented monitoring accompanied by effective measures in response to the employee's alerts.
It accordingly calls on employers to exercise heightened vigilance in the concrete implementation of these mechanisms.
Source: French Supreme Court, 11 March 2026, appeal n° 24-22.163