The exclusion of summer jobs from the benefit of the professional insecurity bonus: does it conform to E.U law ?

  • Home - EN
  • NEWS
  • The exclusion of summer jobs from the benefit of the professional insecurity bonus: does it conform to E.U law ?
Therefore this situation cannot be compared to that of workers entitled to end-of-contract indemnity ie the difference in treatment of these two categories cannot be considered as age discrimination...

The exclusion of summer jobs from the benefit of the professional insecurity bonus: does it conform to E.U law ?

This was the prejudicial question put before the European Court of Justice (ECJ) by the judges of the French employment tribunal.

In the affair which led to this prejudicial question, a student was hired during the university holidays on a 4 day fixed term contract.

At the end of the contract, in conformity with article L 1243-10, 2nd paragraph of the Labour Code, the sudent  received no indemnity for professional insecurity from his employer.

Considering that this legal disposition did not conform with the principle of equality and non-discrimination related to age, the student asked for the  case to be heard by the employment tribunal.

At the time of this first hearing, the student first of all raised an important question concerning constitutionality which was transmitted to the constitutional Council.

The decision  was that the contested disposition conformed to the Constitution, considering that the difference of treatment with regard to others employed under the terms of a fixed term contract was perfectly justified and did not challenge the principle of equality.

Not satisfied with this analysis, the judges of the employment tribunal wished to put the prejudicial question to the ECJ.

In the decision of 1st October 2015, the ECJ deemed that the principle of non-discrimination, related to age, laid out in article 21 of the Charter of European fundamental rights, and confirmed by Directive 2000/78/CE of the Council  held on 27th November 2000 to create a general scheme to promote equality in employment and work, should not be interpreted as opposing a national law, by which an end-of-contract indemnity paid as supplementary income when the contract is not made permanent is not due when the contract is signed with a young person for a period during their school or university holidays.

The ECJ reminded us that the indemnity paid at the end of the fixed term contract is designed to compensate the insecurity of the situation of the employee when the contractual relationship is not continued with a permanent contract.

Therefore, a student who  continues their studies after school or university holidays cannot be considered to be in a situation of professional insecurity, their  work being temporary or accessory by nature.

Contact us

Would you like more information on LAMY LEXEL or make an appointment ? Help us to give you the answer best adapted to your situation by filling in this form and we will answer you as soon as possible.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTERS ON LEGAL NEWS