Working duration in France: A sensitive legal and technical issue
Michael Skaarup
by Michael Skaarup
The regulation of working time in France continues to raise significant legal, political, and social debate. With an historical tradition of social protection, French labour law maintains a standard legal work week of 35 hours. This work duration reduction was introduced in 2000, with the limit was conceived both as a tool to reduce unemployment, and to improve work-life balance.
Today, the issue of working time remains highly sensitive, particularly when examined through the lens of legal compliance, economic competitiveness, and evolving workplace expectations. Viewed from abroad, it looks complex, especially when considering European Union (EU) regulations, but there are solutions and several mechanisms to facilitate practical solutions.
The legal framework: structure and exceptions
Pursuant to Article L3121-27 of the French Labour Code, the legal working time is set at 35 hours per week for full-time employees. Any hours worked beyond this threshold are considered overtime, subject to compensation either through pay or rest, and capped by a legal maximum – typically 48 hours per week and 10 hours per day, with derogations possible under specific collective agreements.
Notably, the 35-hour rule does not equate to a prohibition on longer working hours but functions rather as a threshold for calculating overtime. It is also subject to numerous exceptions, including “forfait jours” (work duration per day) arrangements under Article L3121-58, whereby certain managerial staff agree to work a fixed number of days per year. This mechanism reflects the increasing demand for flexibility, particularly at higher levels of responsibility, but it raises legal concerns regarding working time control and the right to disconnect.
Flexibility through collective bargaining
In practice, working time arrangements are frequently adapted through collective agreements. Since the 2016 El Khomri law and the 2017 Macron legal text, there has been a marked shift toward company-level negotiations, allowing for greater adaptability. Employers may now negotiate annual working time, rest periods, or compensatory leave with employee representatives, provided minimum legal guarantees are respected.
This legal flexibility, however, must be handled with diligence. Any breach of working time regulations exposes the employer to civil liability, criminal penalties, and potential claims for overtime payment and damages. In recent years, French labour courts have scrutinised employers’ failure to monitor actual working hours, particularly in the context of forfait jours contracts, requiring strict compliance with monitoring obligations to ensure employee health and safety.
Economic and social considerations
Beyond legal technicalities, working time regulation lies at the heart of broader economic debates. Critics argue that the 35-hour framework undermines national productivity and places an administrative burden on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Yet, France remains among the most productive countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in terms of output per hour worked. This calls into question the link between shorter working hours and reduced competitiveness.
On the social front, concerns about employee burnout, mental health, and the right to disconnect have gained traction. French law has taken pioneering steps, notably with the 2016 introduction of the “right to disconnect” measure (Article L2242-17 Labour Code), which obliges employers to negotiate protocols governing digital disconnection outside working hours.
Political sensitivities and reform challenges
Working time regulation has consistently proven politically volatile. Legislative attempts to relax or reinterpret the 35-hour standard – such as those linked to pension reforms or budgetary austerity – have provoked widespread protest and industrial action. The issue remains emblematic of a broader cultural attachment to social rights and the equilibrium between professional obligations and personal life.
Reforms are thus approached cautiously. While successive governments have promoted flexibility through decentralised bargaining, few have directly challenged the 35-hour principle, which retains strong symbolic value within the national labour framework.
Looking forward: legal adaptation and new work models
In a context of digital transformation, remote work, and changing employee expectations, the traditional concept of working time is evolving. Legal practitioners and human resources professionals must adapt internal policies to ensure both compliance and competitiveness.
The rise of remote work, responding to the Covid-19 crisis, highlights the need to revisit time-tracking mechanisms, enforce daily and weekly rest periods, and reaffirm the right to disconnect. These evolving dynamics require a delicate balance between contractual freedom, legal oversight, and employee wellbeing.
Conclusion
Working duration in France remains a complex legal issue. While the statutory 35-hour week continues to serve as a cornerstone of French labour law, its practical application is far more nuanced, shaped by derogations, collective bargaining, collective agreements with elected employee representatives, and judicial interpretation. In an era of economic change and shifting work set up, legal professionals must play a central role in helping employers navigate this sensitive field – ensuring both lawful compliance and alignment with evolving business needs. That’s what we do at the Eltea law firm in Paris, with two partners specialised in labour law.
XLNC member firm ELTEA AvocatsParis, FranceT: +33 1 87 89 61 75
Michael Skaarup is a partner at Eltea Avocats and head of the firm’s Danish Desk. He specialises in labour, social security and social protection law, corporate law, M&A, restructuring, distribution, and transport. He advises French companies and subsidiaries of Danish, Scandinavian, and European groups on their projects in France. Contact Michael.
