Is the reimbursement by the employer of remote working (“télétravail”) expenses (systematically) com
Is the reimbursement by the employer of remote working (“télétravail”) expenses (systematically) com
By Emilie Ducorps-Prouvost, attorney and partner and Luana Rustichelli, senior legal advisor
A decision rendered by the Paris Court of Appeal on April 3rd, 2024 offers employers a rough outline of the answer.
Since Ordinance no. 2017-1387 of September 22nd, 2017, the Labor Code no longer requires the employer as such to cover costs arising directly from the exercise of remote working (e.g. hardware, software, IT tools and maintenance of these tools, etc.). In practice, however, the obligation to cover all of an employee's professional expenses means that the employer setting up remote working within the company is obliged to determine how these expenses are to be covered.
This coverage of expenses, which can take several forms (from the reimbursement of actual expenses to the payment of a fixed allowance) differs from the home occupation allowance (“indemnité de sujétion”) which is paid only if no premises are actually made available to the employee by the employer, regardless of whether remote working is compulsory or not.
While on March 21st, 2024, the Versailles Court of Appeal reiterated that the employer is still obliged to cover the expenses incurred by the remote worker if the remote work is implemented due to exceptional circumstances such as a health crisis, the decision rendered by the Paris Court of Appeal on April 3rd takes a more nuanced stance.
The Paris Court of Appeal ruled that the provisions of articles L.1222-9 et seq. of the French Labor Code, relating to remote working, do not require the employer to bear the costs arising directly from remote working in the absence of an agreement between the parties.
However, caution is called for when analyzing this ruling. In fact, the Court of Appeal noted that remote working was an informal practice between the parties and had not been imposed on the employee, who was otherwise able to perform his or her duties within the company premises or in premises made available to him or her.
The Court of Appeal therefore suggests that when remote working is an option offered to the employee, the coverage of the underlying costs is not required, but that, on the contrary, the employer is obliged to cover the costs when remote working is agreed between the parties and/or imposed on the employee (notably due to the absence of premises).
It should be remembered that the decision was rendered by a Court of Appeal: a clarification from the French supreme Court (the “Cour de cassation”) is therefore awaited on this matter.
A decision rendered by the Paris Court of Appeal on April 3rd, 2024 offers employers a rough outline of the answer.
Since Ordinance no. 2017-1387 of September 22nd, 2017, the Labor Code no longer requires the employer as such to cover costs arising directly from the exercise of remote working (e.g. hardware, software, IT tools and maintenance of these tools, etc.). In practice, however, the obligation to cover all of an employee's professional expenses means that the employer setting up remote working within the company is obliged to determine how these expenses are to be covered.
This coverage of expenses, which can take several forms (from the reimbursement of actual expenses to the payment of a fixed allowance) differs from the home occupation allowance (“indemnité de sujétion”) which is paid only if no premises are actually made available to the employee by the employer, regardless of whether remote working is compulsory or not.
While on March 21st, 2024, the Versailles Court of Appeal reiterated that the employer is still obliged to cover the expenses incurred by the remote worker if the remote work is implemented due to exceptional circumstances such as a health crisis, the decision rendered by the Paris Court of Appeal on April 3rd takes a more nuanced stance.
The Paris Court of Appeal ruled that the provisions of articles L.1222-9 et seq. of the French Labor Code, relating to remote working, do not require the employer to bear the costs arising directly from remote working in the absence of an agreement between the parties.
However, caution is called for when analyzing this ruling. In fact, the Court of Appeal noted that remote working was an informal practice between the parties and had not been imposed on the employee, who was otherwise able to perform his or her duties within the company premises or in premises made available to him or her.
The Court of Appeal therefore suggests that when remote working is an option offered to the employee, the coverage of the underlying costs is not required, but that, on the contrary, the employer is obliged to cover the costs when remote working is agreed between the parties and/or imposed on the employee (notably due to the absence of premises).
It should be remembered that the decision was rendered by a Court of Appeal: a clarification from the French supreme Court (the “Cour de cassation”) is therefore awaited on this matter.
BDO AVOCATS employment law team remains available for any question or further information you may require on the implementation of remote working, the rights and obligations arising from it, as well as on all other employment, social security and immigration laws-related issues.
References: Paris Court of Appeal, April 3rd, 2024, n° 21/07292
Versailles Court of Appeal, March 21st, 2024, n° 22/01810