You never saw them to try in this area to European texts

The French eat long illusion that social matters, Europe has nothing to teach them and that French laws are always a step ahead of the European directives.

If there is one area where they are heavily wrong, it is that health and safety at work. To cite a recent example, the France still not put its legislation on risks related to noise in accordance with a directive of 2003 owing to would be incorporated into national law no later than February 15, 2006.

For a long time, the judges of the Court of cassation gave the impression that they shared this belief. You never saw them to try, in this area to European texts. It was that an impression, just as we prove a judgment of 28 February 2006.

Trivial case: a technical agent is the victim of an accident at work. The outcome of two cases, he resumed his position without the medical examination of recovery under the Act but, still in poor health, is working as a dotted line. The employer terminates the for absences repeated disrupting business and requiring its ultimate replacement. The technician then seizes the Industrial Court citing two injuries: not unjustified but frankly illegal dismissal and the lack of medical recovery.

The Court of appeal of Douai rejected the liability on the employee: for her, embodying the work without waiting for the medical visit, visit that he himself could seek, he ended the period of suspension of his contract of employment; his dismissal was, therefore, disconnected from the accident at work.

Issuing a message

This interpretation, believes the Court of cassation, is not in the meaning of article l. 230 - 2 of the Labour Code, if interpreted in the light of the directive n 89/391 of 12 June 1989 European.

These two texts, it is not the employee who has relied on, it is the Court which has identified Office: is this beyond the practical answer to the question, the Court will issue a message.

The practical solution is this: the return of an occupational disease or after an absence of at least eight days because of an accident at work, article r. 241 - 51 of the Labour Code imposes a return visit, which means that the employment contract is suspended as long as the medical examination took place (Cass.) Soc., 28 Feb. 2006, no. 05 - 41 555). The information is not trivial because it means that the employee remains protected until the visit has been made: the employer cannot dismiss him for misconduct serious or if it is unable, for a reason unrelated to the accident at work, to maintain the contract of employment. This diagnosis is not new, it had already been several years (Cass.) Soc., 10 nov. 1998; 6 APR. 1999, 12 Dec. (2000).

What is new, and to justify the broad advertising in that case that has been selected for the website of the Court, will be published in its newsletter and commented in its annual report, it is so well, it seems, will marked to implement the European Directive.

And then, is to ask, what is this change

This suggests a different approach to the issues of health and safety at work by the French courts. Example: stress. End of 2004, the Louis Harris company conducted a study on "the sensitivity of opinion on the conditions of work" on behalf of the Ministry of labour which showed that 38 of the assets believed to be exposed, while 13 only feel concerned by the moral harassment. However, if there is a French legislation on harassment, of the Labour Code ignores the stress. The case law on social security touches the subject in recognizing the nature of injury to the nerve depressions caused by work, but it is only of marginal cases.

The Charter European social rights, on the other hand, refers specifically the question, as she talks about drugs, alcohol, tobacco and the use of sedatives, and employers, with the help of the occupational health services, expects concrete actions.