France

During demonstrations against the pension reform in December 2019, the CGT recorded 31 cases of anti-union repression, included numerous arbitrary arrests and detentions by law enforcement officers.
On 16 January 2020, at the end of one of the rallies organised in Paris, the partner of the general secretary of the CGT national journalists’ union was arrested by BAC (anti-crime brigade) officers in Place d’Italie, reportedly for peacefully opposing the arrest of two young people who were sitting quietly and talking. After several hours trying to ascertain the demonstrator’s whereabouts, with no help from the police, the CGT finally found out that she was being held at the police station in the 5^th arrondissement and had been accused of violence against the police. She was finally released on Saturday 18 January 2020, after having spent two nights in a cell and being cautioned.
The CGT reported that there were at least 13 victims of police violence in the trade union sections of demonstrations held during 2019.

During the social protests of December 2019 and 20 January 2020, the CFDT’s premises in Paris and Dijon were vandalised. In Paris, the confederation’s offices were stormed by hooded individuals who cut off the electricity. A complaint was lodged by the confederation. 

“Nearly one in three working people (29%) and one in two union members (52%) consider union discrimination to be a regular or very regular occurrence,” according to the 12^th Barometer of the Defender of Rights on the perception of discrimination in employment, focusing on anti-union discrimination in 2019. The Rights Defender’s report, published on 19 September 2019, also shows that a third of the working population “believes that fear of reprisals from management is the factor that most dissuades employees from engaging in trade union activity”.
Strong involvement in visible trade union activity (long-term membership, strikes, leafleting, holding a trade union post, participating in negotiations, etc.) substantially increases the likelihood of experiencing discrimination. Trade union representatives in particular reported significantly higher exposure to discrimination and to a deterioration in their working conditions. In addition, unionised men, blue-collar workers, people with disabilities or chronic illnesses, and unionised workers with dependants reported a higher level of discrimination than others. This discrimination takes the form of “lack of career development or promotion opportunities, barriers to increases in pay and a deterioration in the working environment or working conditions”.
Finally, almost eight out of ten union members who believe they have been discriminated against have tried to remedy the situation, primarily by approaching their union and/or their employer. Nearly four times out of ten, the people who take such initiatives feel they have been retaliated against by their employer as a result. For four out of ten people, difficulties providing evidence dissuaded them from taking steps to defend their rights.

The French Democratic Confederation of Labour (Confédération française démocratique du travail - CFDT) reports that in 2017, following a strike, three workers who took part were dismissed for no good reason. It became clear that it was indeed their participation in this collective action that was being punished.

In 2017, the General Confederation of Labour (Confédération générale du travail - CGT) observed many cases in which CGT activists were subjected to discriminatory measures, including criminal procedures, owing to their trade union activities. It notes in particular the following cases:
  A CGT member from the building federation was ordered to pay a 17,500 euro fine on 16 October 2017 for distributing leaflets and throwing confetti during a demonstration against hardship at work in 2014. An appeal is underway;
  On 10 March 2017 a trade unionist from Sud Rail committed suicide at his workplace. The union rep had won rulings against the SNCF, the national railways company, on several occasions, for anti-union discrimination and harassment, but the appeals court overturned the rulings in September 2016 over legal technicalities. The trade unionist clearly indicated the reason for his suicide. An internal inquiry is ongoing;
  On 28 November 2017, in Gennevilliers, 100 workers from the GEODIS-Calberson company, affiliated to the CGT, complained of the management’s daily harassment against union reps, including the dismissal of delegates for distributing leaflets on company premises. The case has been referred to the industrial tribunal;
  A CGT union delegate at LIDL has finally been reinstated by order of the court. He was dismissed for the first time in 2015, then when that dismissal was annulled, he was dismissed a second time in 2017. The barely disguised reason for these dismissals was his trade union activities and his role in representing the staff;
  During a demonstration for undocumented workers on 6 July 2107, two CGT trade unionists who work for the Ministry of Labour were accused of facilitating the demonstrators’ access to the Ministry premises. They received an official warning;
  A labour inspector affiliated to the CGT was the target of disciplinary proceedings for violating her duty of discretion for criticising the proposed reforms of the labour inspectorate;
  In 2016a labour inspector affiliated to the CGT took part in a public debate against the labour law in his role as a trade union representative. In 2017, he received warning letters and an administrative sanction for doing so;
  A strike was organised on 7 July 2017 at the PSA Normandie car company by the CGT and Sud Industrie. Following the strike the PSA group management tightened up its rules concerning access to trade union premises for these two organisations;
  In April 2017, a CGT trade unionist, responsible for technical services in a local district in Picardie, had his post removed by the Mayor, officially to make savings. In reality, the only purpose of this decision was to get rid of a trade union representative;
  Three elected representatives of the CGT and CGT-FO in an association in Puy de Dôme, who were members of the occupational health and safety committee, were dismissed for asking questions of management, and for carrying out their trade union mandate.
  On 22 February 2017 the courts finally recognised the harassment and discrimination against a CGT delegate employed by a cheese manufacturer in Jura: these concerned his working conditions (underground), his salary and unfair disciplinary measures (two attempts at dismissal);
  In November 2017 the industrial tribunal ruled in the CGT’s favour over the organisation of break times for Coved drivers and dustbin collectors in Normandie. The company retaliated by sacking the three trade unionists identified as being at the origin of the case in February 2018;
  The management of a hospital sacked three CGT staff reps, supposedly for serious misdemeanour. The union reps complained of fierce anti-union repression and have appealed to an industrial tribunal.

The French Democratic Confederation of Labour (Confédération française démocratique du travail - CFDT) reports that 16 workers in an enterprise faced difficulties in 2017 when their management refused to pay them for their break time in accordance with the collective agreement in force. In another case, a hospital did not respect the provisions of an agreement on working time, with the result that employees worked an additional 20 to 25 hours a year.

In 2017, the French Democratic Confederation of Labour (Confédération française démocratique du travail - CFDT) recorded cases of harassment and career delays. In one example, a worker with several mandates (staff delegate, substitute member of the works council, CFDT representative on the occupational health and safety committee) found he was constantly monitored and challenged by his employer every time he had to interrupt his work. In another case, the CFDT reports that three of its activists faced difficulties in their workplace, being sidelined and harassed, while the employers repeated requests to be allowed to dismiss them were refused by the labour inspectorate.

On 30 January 2017, the General Confederation of Labour (Confédération générale du travail - CGT) and the CGT-Workers’ Power (CGT-Force ouvrière or CGT-FO) lodged a complaint with the ILO for the violation of ILO Conventions 87, 98 and 158.

The trade union organisations consider that the inversion of the hierarchy of standards operated by the labour law and its ordinances of 2017 constitutes a serious violation of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining (Conventions 87 and 98). This law systematically refers bargaining back to the enterprise level and favours the conclusion of agreements that fall outside the norms and are unfavourable to employees. While it is true that it is still possible to negotiate at a higher level, such as the sector level, such negotiations in reality have no effect. The law says that once an enterprise agreement exists, it takes superiority over the sector agreement as far as working time, leave and rest periods are concerned.

The complaint is based principally on the interpretation of Conventions 87 and 98 by the ILO’s Freedom of Association committee, notably in 2012 when it ruled on a very similar case concerning draft reforms by the Greek government for the decentralisation of collective bargaining at the enterprise level. On that occasion it stated: “the elaboration of procedures systematically favouring decentralised bargaining of exclusionary provisions that are less favourable than the provisions at a higher level can lead to a global destabilisation of the collective bargaining machinery and of worker’s and employers’ organisations and constitutes in this regard a weakening of freedom of association and collective bargaining contrary to the principles of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98”.

The CGT and the CGT-FO therefore consider that the fact that the law imposes decentralised bargaining, in other words systematically refers it back to the enterprise level, leading to the adoption of provisions that are less favourable for workers than those at a higher level (such as the sector) is a violation of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. The complaint is still before the committee.

In February 2016, Frédéric Willemain, CGT trade union representative at temporary employment agency Start People, was suspended. The company has initiated the procedure to dismiss him on grounds of gross misconduct. He is accused of having prevented temporary employees from entering the Post Office of Rivesaltes (Pyrénées-Orientales), on 16 December 2015, and of having assaulted the director of the Post Office, which the trade unionist firmly denies. The CGT had sent him there to support the Post Office workers on strike and to inform the temporary employees, illegally hired to replace them, of their rights. A labour inspectorate inquiry had, moreover, acknowledged the illegal use of temporary workers to replace strikers.

In 2015, following legal proceedings lasting several years, the justice system condemned the national rail company SNCF and the Air Liquide group to pay heavy fines for discriminating against trade union members, be it in terms of pay or promotion. Agence France Presse (AFP) was also found guilty of discriminating against a member of the Syndicat National des Journalistes (SNJ-CGT), whose applications for promotion were repeatedly turned down without any explanation or objective cause. The case reflects a negative trend in France: trade union representatives are less likely to be promoted than their work colleagues and are paid ten per cent less, on average, than colleagues with the same characteristics (age, qualifications, years in service, etc. In addition, 40% of trade union representatives say their role has affected their career. Many employees, moreover, avoid joining a union for fear of reprisals. It should be noted that the new law on social dialogue passed in 2015 includes provisions to prevent workers’ representatives from being “penalised in their careers”.

In August, Mediapart, an online media site, revealed that a human resources director at IT services giant Atos sent instructions to managers of the group regarding the filling of posts, asking them not to select trade union representatives, people aged over 55 and people with disabilities.

In its latest report, France’s Trade Union Discrimination and Repression Observatory covers the other facets of trade union repression: blackmail, intimidation, disciplinary action, harassment and dismissal. To quote a just a few examples, in September, McDonald’s was condemned, on appeal, for having dismissed a CGT representative who had taken part in trade union training during working hours. His request for leave had not been accepted. McDonald’s had dismissed him for arriving “two hours and 13 minutes” late. On 22 September, Julien Sanchez, mayor of Beaucaire (Gard), a member of the extreme-right party Front National, was condemned for hate speech targeting a trade unionist from the CGT. In mid December, 18 delivery drivers employed at the central canteen of Sodexo in Marseille were dismissed for abandoning their posts on 25 November, whilst they were striking for the second day in a row.

On 25 November 2015, the management at the central canteen of Sodexo in Marseille suspended 23 delivery drivers, who were on strike at the time, for “abandoning their posts” and “gross misconduct”. After two days of strike action, an agreement ending the strike was concluded between the management and the majority of the workplace representatives. These 23 employers had, however, denounced the agreement, considering the wage concessions they had been granted to be totally inadequate. Despite having been informed that the 23 workers were continuing with the strike, Sodexo’s regional director did not hesitate to sack them. By mid-December, 19 of them had received their letter of dismissal, and the other four had been rehired on the condition that they withdraw support for the strike. In January 2016, amid the media uproar and the announcement of renewed protest actions, the management of Sodexo France negotiated an agreement directly with the CGT to end the dispute and to reinstate 11 of the 19 strikers.

On 17 December 2015, police broke up a picket line organised by the inter-union grouping CFDT, CGT, FO and CFTC in protest at the undermining of the bonus scheme at ID Logistics in Lisse in the department of Essonne. Meanwhile, the employer initiated the procedure to dismiss 35 of the strikers, including 11 trade union representatives

Although the outbreak of trouble during labour disputes is increasingly rare, trade unions are witnessing a rise in the criminalisation of their actions. The sporadic, spur-of-the-moment incidents arising here and there are met with legal prosecution and are often severely punished. Although the trade union leaderships by no means endorse such acts, which invariably arise within a context of serious attacks on social and labour rights, they point out that such incidents are highlighted, to stigmatise and discredit the trade union movement, as illustrated in the three cases below.

Firstly, on 23 September 2015, five members of CGT-Énergie appeared before a criminal court in Paris for “obstructing the freedom to work”. In 2008, they had occupied an EDF (Electricité de France) plant along with 200 other employees to contest the dismissal of an employee who was “guilty” of having given evidence within the framework of a workplace accident that the company was trying to conceal. In the verdict delivered on 12 January, two of the defendants – including the general secretary of CGT-Énergie Paris, Cédric Liechti – were ordered to pay fines.

Then, on 12 October, six Air France employees were arrested and held in police custody for “acts of violence” during a demonstration on 5 October at the airline company’s headquarters in Roissy. The company also initiated disciplinary proceedings against some 20 workers. Appalled by the announcement of a restructuring plan involving 2,900 redundancies, the employees stormed a central works council meeting. Two executives and three security guards were allegedly manhandled. The Air France inter-trade union committee denounced “a mockery of justice”, and demanded that the criminal charges and the disciplinary measures be dropped. The International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) supported the unions.

Finally, on 12 January 2016, a court sentenced eight former workers from the Goodyear plant in Amiens to 24 months’ imprisonment, including nine to be served behind bars, for “hostage-taking”. The eight trade unionists had detained two plant managers for thirty hours, in January 2014, in protest at the closure of the site, which took place a few days later. The defence lawyer pleaded, to no avail, an “outburst of rage”, in reaction to the management team’s refusal to respond to the social distress being suffered by the 1,142 employees of Goodyear in Amiens. A petition calling for the quashing of the court decision, which is being appealed, gathered over 1,665,000 signatures. The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and the ITUC took part in this mobilisation.

On 13 January, the justice system opened an inquiry into Orpea’s surveillance of its employees, following a complaint by the CGT in December 2014. The Franco-Canadian group managing clinics and retirement homes, one of the world’s biggest in this sector, had hired Groupe Synergie Globale (GSG) to spy on staff at three clinics in 2010. The mission, officially to provide “social risk management advice”, was given to three fake employees who infiltrated three clinics for over a year, to inform the management about the social climate in general and, in particular, the actions and movements of the trade unionists. One of these “moles” managed to secure election as a CGT representative. He took part in trade union meetings and even served on a working committee of the CGT’s health and social action federation Fédération de la Santé et de l’Action Sociale.
Following the discovery of the surveillance operation, Orpea proceeded to make all manner of concessions to the CGT to avoid legal proceedings, which, in 2014, the latter refused to accept. The same staff surveillance methods have also been used at Ikea
.

Sylvie Delmas, general secretary of the CGT at Arcachon Hospital, was called to appear before the establishment’s disciplinary council in September. She was accused of “breaching confidentiality”, after denouncing problems at the hospital, despite the fact that the comments were made in her capacity as trade union representative and did not fall within the framework of her duty to observe professional secrecy.

Five CGT members from Roanne were convicted on 19 November 2012 of having written a slogan on a wall during the pension reform dispute in 2010. They were found guilty but exempted from punishment. The five men refused to give the DNA samples taken from criminal offenders for the Automated National File of Genetic Prints (FNAEG).
Two of them were subsequently driven to the police station and placed in custody on 23 May 2013 to force them to provide DNA samples, which they once again refused to give.
The three other trade unionists went to the police station on their own initiative but also refused to provide DNA samples.
The five CGT members were summoned to appear for a hearing at the Court of Roanne on 5 November. Refusing to give a biological sample constitutes a crime punishable by a maximum sentence of one year in prison and a 15,000 euro fine.
The Justice Minister had, nonetheless, committed to revising Article 706-56 of the Penal Procedure Code with a view to excluding those receiving convictions linked to trade union activities from the DNA file.

The new rules on representativeness approved by the two largest trade union centres, Confédération française démocratique du travail (CFDT) and Confédération générale du travail (CGT), have been contested by several unions, including the Confédération générale du travail-Force ouvrière (CGT-FO), which filed a complaint with the ILO, alleging that the legislation concerning social democracy, passed in 2008, infringes freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. Representativeness criteria based on voting strength has become mandatory, with the setting of representativeness thresholds of 10% of the votes for unions and representatives in elections at company or workplace level and 30% for collective agreements to be declared valid. The CGT-FO complaint refers to the criteria for the appointment of union representatives, the procedure to determine representativeness in the event of restructuring, the uncertainties during the transition period, the duration of the mandates and the constant electioneering that could undermine social dialogue, which the law was designed to improve.

In November, the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association concluded by inviting the government to examine the possibility of revising the legislation with regard to the appointment of trade union representatives and to refer the examination of various other criticisms to the High Council for Social Dialogue (HCDS), which is due to issue an opinion on the results of the assessment of union voting strength in 2013, at the end of the first electoral cycle after the legislation’s entry into force. As regards the representativeness thresholds, the committee considered them to be compatible with the principles of freedom of association.

Acts of anti-union discrimination were punished by courts on several occasions during 2011. On 12 April, for example, the appeal court of Nîmes condemned computer company Dell to pay damages and interest to a CGT union representative for discrimination and moral harassment, based on “unjustified sanctions following any procedure with any trade union overtones, the comments made regarding the activities related to his trade union position, his physical sidelining combined with the suppression of all his tasks... conduct which constitutes harassment aimed at weakening working conditions in a way likely to affect rights and dignity”. Several court cases were won by union representatives, whose career development was deemed to have been clearly blocked on grounds of their union involvement by employers such as Wagon automobile, Renault, the Caisse générale de sécurité sociale (social security department) in Reunion and the Caisse primaire assurance maladie (public health insurance department).

In February, the Confédération générale du travail (CGT) lodged a complaint with the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association against the French government, following the requisitioning in the oil industry during the massive protests against the pension reform in October 2010. Trade unions had strongly criticised the government’s reaction to the protests at the time: its all-out refusal to negotiate, attempts to weaken the protest movement and abusive requisitioning of workers. The CGT estimated at 160 the number of striking workers requisitioned. The confederation pointed out that the authorities’ aim was not to ensure a minimum service in an essential service but clearly to break a strike. In November, the Committee on Freedom of Association requested the government “to ensure that, in future situations where a non-essential service is paralysed, but where measures to ensure a minimum service could be justified, the workers’ and employers’ organsations concerned are involved in the decision-making process, and that measures are not imposed unilaterally”.

Throughout the year undocumented workers in many towns organised strike pickets and occupied public buildings or the premises of small enterprises to demand regularisation. Several local temporary employment agencies were occupied. Often they were evicted, sometimes brutally, following court orders. Support from trade unions and many associations had an impact in terms of government commitments on the criteria and procedures for the regularisation of undocumented workers. The national trade union centres are very attentive to the situation of migrant workers. Those who do not enjoy the protection that would come from having legal status are exposed to very low quality and low paid jobs. Their situation makes any trade union involvement particularly difficult, and therefore strongly impacts on their access to the rights guaranteed by ILO Conventions 87 and 98.

Despite the failure of the unions’ efforts to change the pension reforms, they did prove their great capacity to mobilise the population. According to analysts, the unions’ image has been improved by this crisis. The unions appear to the French to be more pragmatic than in the past. However the “fear of reprisals” is even greater than it was a few years ago, preventing workers from joining the unions.

Two Decrees passed on 16 October 2009 have instituted two police files recording personal data, including information on trade union involvement. According to the CGT, CFDT, FO and CFTC, although the government had to withdraw its decision to place certain sensitive information on file, such as health profiles and sexual orientation, following mass trade union and popular protests, these files still constitute a serious threat to trade union rights and freedoms.

According to Decree 2009-1250 of 16 October 2009, the administrative inquiries foreseen in the event of recruitment, appointment, authorisation, approval or accreditation relates to public and private employment in a wide range of areas (linked to state sovereignty, security or defence; competitions, bets and races; areas protected due to the nature of the activities conducted in them, such as nuclear power stations, airports, etc., jobs involving materials, products or activities posing a threat to public security). According to Article 3, the storage of data “contained in an inquiry report, related to any conduct incompatible with the exercise of the posts or missions envisaged, is authorised, even in the event that this conduct may have a political, religious, philosophical or trade union motive”.

The Decree concerning the prevention of threats to public security (Decree no. 2009-1249 of 16 October 2009), for its part, authorises the collection of supplementary information related to “political, philosophical, religious or trade union activities”, with a view to preventing threats to public security.
The periods for which the data collected under these decrees can be stored is limited to ten years, but are “sliding”, as the starting date may be moved if new information is recorded in the file.
Decree 2009-1250 provides for a right to information, but not the right to oppose or amend the content of the file. Citizens placed on file under the terms of Decree 2009-1249 have no right to information (on the fact that they are on file), no right to amend the content of the file, and no right of opposition (i.e. to refuse being on file).

Anti-union discrimination, following the transposition of European directives 2000/43 of 29 June 2000 and 2000/78 of 27 November 2000 into French law, is prohibited, in principle. In reality, there are numerous cases of anti-union discrimination every year, some of which are sanctioned by the courts.