On March 13, 2013, the French Supreme Court issued a decision concerning the equal treatment principle and company pension schemes, limiting this principle to employees who are from the same professional group.
A company decided to solely implement a company health insurance scheme for its employees with a different funding policy for different categories of employee. In respect of managers and supervisors the company took responsibility for all contributions, but paid only 60 % of the total contributions due in respect of other categories of employee. 124 employees were excluded from the all included contribution plan by the company, and therefore commenced an action for breach of equal treatment and for reimbursement of contributions they had to pay.
The labour court of Melun found in favour of the employees and ordered the employer to pay to the employees who were excluded from the all included contribution plan, a payment in respect of contributions back pay. This was because the sole difference of professional category could not justify differences in treatment from the employer. The employer had argued that the reason for the difference in treatment between managers and non-managers was to attract and retain managers but provided no additional evidence explaining that policy and the reasons why he wanted to reach such goal.
The appeal from the company against the decision of the Labour Court was considered on the basis of the equal treatment principle.
In the ruling, the French Supreme Court states "due to the specific characteristics of pension schemes, which depends on specificities for each professional group, and therefore require in their implementation an external body outside of the company, and taking into account the solidarity goal, the equal treatment is only applicable between employees who are from the same professional group."
It should be noted such precedent was also followed in two other judgments dated 13th march 2013 with similar facts (Cass. Soc., 13 march 2013 n°R. 10-28022 and Cass. Soc., n°E. 11-23761). The Court of Cassation's previous position about the equal treatment principle concerning the financing of pension schemes is now clearly affirmed and confirmed.
Content is for general information purposes only. The information provided is not intended to be comprehensive and it does not constitute or contain legal or other advice. If you require assistance in relation to any issue please seek specific advice relevant to your particular circumstances. In particular, no responsibility shall be accepted by the authors or by Abbiss Cadres LLP for any losses occasioned by reliance on any content appearing on or accessible from this article. For further legal information click here.
Circular 230 disclosure
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this article (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
If you would like to copy or otherwise reproduce this article then you may do so provided that: (1) any such copy or reproduction is for your own personal use or if it is made available to any third party it is done so on a free of charge basis; and (2) the article is reproduced in full together with the contact details, disclaimer and any logos as they appear on each article.