Paid Leave: Employer May Choose Calculation Method, Subject to Conditions
Droit-immobilier

Paid Leave: Employer May Choose Calculation Method, Subject to Conditions

📅 Décision du 11 May 2016⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 4 vues📖 7 min de lecture

The Court of Cassation validates the counting of paid leave in working days by the employer, provided the employee actually benefits from 25 working days (5 weeks). The calculation method does not matter as long as the result is no less favourable than the law.

Reference Decision: cc • No. 15-10.252 • 2016-05-11 • View the decision →

Imagine for a moment: you have been working for months without taking a single day of leave. You are looking forward to your holiday in Saint-Jean-de-Luz. But when you check your payslip, you notice that your employer is counting your leave days differently from what you expected. You ask yourself: is this legal? This is a question thousands of employees ask themselves every year.

The answer came from the Court of Cassation on 11 May 2016 (decision no. 15-10.252). The judges ruled that the employer may use the calculation method of its choice – in working days, calendar days, or hours – provided the employee actually benefits from five weeks of leave, i.e. 25 working days. In other words, it is the result that matters, not the method.

This decision, which arose from a dispute between a pharmaceutical laboratory and several employees, sheds light on a common grey area in employment relations. Whether you are an employer or an employee, it is essential to understand exactly what this decision says, to avoid nasty surprises. Let us dive into the details.

The Facts: A Story That Happens Every Day

The case concerns the company Lafarge (now LafargeHolcim) and several employees working as laboratory technical agents. Among them are Mr D., Mrs B., Mrs S. and Mr R. The dispute concerns the method of calculating paid leave. The employer counted leave in working days (the days actually worked in the company, generally Monday to Friday). But the employees argued that this method was less favourable to them than the legal method, which provides for 30 calendar days (i.e. Monday to Saturday).

In practice, when an employee took a day off, the employer considered it as one working day. But the employee argued that in reality, they only benefited from 25 working days per year, whereas the law guaranteed them 30 calendar days. The employer, for its part, claimed that counting in working days was perfectly valid because it allowed the employee to take five full weeks of leave, i.e. 25 working days – which corresponds to 30 calendar days.

The conflict began before the industrial tribunal (the court with jurisdiction for individual labour disputes). The employees lost at first instance and then appealed. The Pau Court of Appeal (whose jurisdiction covers, among others, Saint-Jean-de-Luz and Tarbes) ruled in their favour, considering that counting in working days was less favourable. The employer then appealed to the Court of Cassation (an appeal challenging the interpretation of the law).

The Reasoning of the Court – Analysed

The Court of Cassation quashed (annulled) the decision of the Pau Court of Appeal. To understand why, we must go back to the texts. The Labour Code (Article L.3141-3) provides that every employee is entitled to 30 calendar days of paid leave per year. However, the employer may count leave in working days, provided the employee actually benefits from 5 weeks of leave, i.e. 25 working days (Monday to Friday).

The central question was: is counting in working days in itself less favourable? The Court answered no. What matters is the concrete result: did the employee actually have 25 working days of leave (i.e. five weeks)? If so, the calculation method adopted by the employer is irrelevant. The decision states: "The Court of Appeal justified its decision approving the employer's calculation of paid leave rights by, regardless of the calculation method adopted, noting that the employees had actually had twenty-five working days of paid leave." In other words, the Pau Court of Appeal should have verified the result, not focused on the method.

The lower court judges (the Court of Appeal) had considered that counting in working days was less favourable because one working day counts as one day, whereas one calendar day counts as one and a half days (since the week has 6 calendar days). But the Court of Cassation reminds that this reasoning is incorrect: an employee who takes a week of leave in working days takes 5 days, not 6. If they take 5 weeks, they take 25 working days, which is equivalent to 30 calendar days. Therefore, there is no loss.

This decision is a confirmation of earlier case law: the Court of Cassation had already ruled in 2008 (no. 06-44.009) that counting in working days is lawful, provided the employee benefits from 5 weeks. So there is no reversal or major evolution, but a useful reminder for the Courts of Appeal.

What This Changes for You – Concrete Implications

If you are an employee: Check your payslip and your leave records. If your employer uses a working day count, make sure you are taking 25 days per year (i.e. 5 weeks). If not, you can claim additional days. For example, if you work in Tarbes for a company that counts in working days, and you only take 20 days a year, you are being disadvantaged. In that case, contact your employer first, then, if necessary, the unions or a lawyer.

If you are an employer: You are free to choose the method of counting (working days, calendar days, hours), but you must guarantee the employee a number of leave days at least equivalent to 5 weeks. Beware: if you use a working day count, you must ensure that the employee does not take less than 25 days per year. A common trap: some employers count in working days but only grant 30 calendar days, which effectively gives 5 extra days (i.e. 30 working days). That is possible, but you must be consistent in your communication.

If you are a property professional (property manager): Although this decision concerns labour law, it illustrates a general principle: in law, the concrete result often prevails over form. In co-ownership, for example, a method of calculating charges may be disputed, but if it results in a fair distribution, the courts may validate it.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

  • Check your collective bargaining agreement: It may provide for a specific counting method (e.g. calendar days). If so, the employer must apply it, unless there is a more favourable company agreement.
  • Document your rights: Keep a personal record of leave taken and remaining. In the event of a dispute, you will have tangible evidence.
  • Submit your leave requests in writing: Use a traceable tool (email, HR software) to avoid disputes over the number of days taken.
  • If in doubt, seek legal advice: A quick consultation with a lawyer specialising in labour law (such as Maître Zakine) can clarify your rights and avoid costly litigation.

Further Analysis: Related Case Law and Developments

This decision is part of a consistent line of the Social Chamber of the Court of Cassation. As early as 2008 (no. 06-44.009), it ruled that "the method of calculating paid leave adopted by the employer, whether in working days or calendar days, must result in the employee benefiting from five weeks of leave". The 2016 decision merely confirms this principle.

Another interesting decision is that of 13 March 2013 (no. 11-22.285), where the Court specified that if the employer uses a working day count, it must clearly inform employees of the method used, failing which the flat-rate agreement in days is void. Transparency is therefore essential.

In practice, the courts are increasingly attentive to compliance with the actual result. The trend is to protect the employee, but without excessive formalism. For the future, we can expect the Court of Cassation to continue to favour a balance between employer flexibility and guarantee of employee rights.

What You Absolutely Must Remember

FAQ:

  • Can my employer count my leave in hours? Yes, provided the annual total corresponds to 5 weeks (i.e. 35 hours per week, so 175 hours for a 35-hour week).
  • I am on a flat-rate days scheme, is it different? Yes, employees on a flat-rate days scheme are entitled to additional rest days (RTT), but the principle of 5 weeks of paid leave remains the same.
  • What should I do if my employer only grants me 20 working days? You are entitled to claim the missing 5 days. First contact your employer, then the industrial tribunal.
  • Can I challenge a working day count if my collective bargaining agreement provides for calendar days? Yes, the collective agreement may be more favourable. You must then benefit from the most advantageous calculation method.
  • Is there a time limit to take action? Yes, a legal action for a leave dispute is time-barred after 3 years from the date you became aware of your rights.

Are you in a similar situation? A first 30-minute consultation with Maître Zakine (€45) can save you months of proceedings – and often much more. Book an appointment →

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Prendre rendez-vous pour une consultation  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Questions fréquentes

Mon employeur peut-il compter mes congés en jours ouvrés ?

Oui, c'est légal si vous bénéficiez effectivement de 25 jours ouvrés par an (5 semaines). Le mode de calcul n'est pas imposé par la loi, seul le résultat compte.

Que faire si mon employeur ne m'accorde que 20 jours ouvrés de congés ?

Vous êtes en droit de réclamer les 5 jours manquants. Contactez d'abord votre employeur, puis, en l'absence de régularisation, saisissez le conseil de prud'hommes dans un délai de 3 ans.

Quels sont les délais pour contester un décompte de congés payés ?

L'action en justice se prescrit par 3 ans à compter de la date à laquelle vous avez eu connaissance de vos droits. Il est donc important d'agir rapidement.

Le décompte en jours ouvrés est-il moins favorable que le décompte en jours ouvrables ?

Non, si l'employeur accorde 25 jours ouvrés, cela équivaut à 30 jours ouvrables (5 semaines). Il n'y a pas de différence en termes de durée de repos.

Ma convention collective prévoit un décompte en jours ouvrables, mon employeur peut-il utiliser les jours ouvrés ?

Oui, mais uniquement si le résultat est au moins aussi favorable. Si la convention collective vous accorde 30 jours ouvrables (soit 5 semaines), l'employeur peut utiliser les jours ouvrés à condition de vous donner 25 jours ouvrés. Si la convention est plus favorable (par exemple 6 semaines), l'employeur doit appliquer la convention.

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 15-10.252
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 11 mai 2016

Mots-clés

congés payésjours ouvrésCour de cassationdroit du travailméthode de calcul

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Employee in Saint-Jean-de-Luz: Insufficient working day count

Mrs L., a sales representative at a real estate agency in Saint-Jean-de-Luz, finds that her employer grants her only 22 working days of leave per year, although she works Monday to Friday. She believes she is being disadvantaged.

Application pratique:

Under the decision of 11 May 2016, Mrs L. is entitled to 25 working days. She should first request the missing 3 days in writing from her employer. If refused, she can take the matter to the Bayonne industrial tribunal within 3 years. She may also claim damages for harm suffered.

2

Employer in Tarbes: Choice of hourly count

Mr P., manager of a small company with 20 employees in Tarbes, wishes to count leave in hours for greater precision. His employees work 35 hours per week.

Application pratique:

The decision validates this choice, provided each employee benefits from 175 hours of leave per year (35h x 5 weeks). Mr P. must clearly inform employees of the method and keep a register. In the event of an inspection, he must be able to prove that the result is indeed 5 weeks.

3

Property professional in Pau: Managing a caretaker's leave

A co-ownership management company in Pau employs a full-time caretaker. The contract provides for a calendar day count, but the caretaker requests a working day count, believing he is disadvantaged.

Application pratique:

The management company may maintain the calendar day count (30 days per year). However, if the caretaker works 5 days a week, 30 calendar days are equivalent to 25 working days, i.e. 5 weeks. There is no difference. The management company simply needs to ensure that the caretaker actually takes 30 calendar days (5 weeks).

Maître Cécile Zakine

À propos de l'auteur

Maître Cécile Zakine — Avocate au Barreau des Alpes-Maritimes, Docteur en Droit. Chaque article de ce magazine est rédigé à partir de l'analyse d'une décision de jurisprudence réelle, commentée et mise en perspective par les équipes de Maître Zakine.

Prendre rendez-vous →

Avertissement: Les analyses présentées sur ce site sont fournies à titre informatif uniquement et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques personnalisés. Pour une consultation adaptée à votre situation, contactez un avocat.

Articles similaires en Droit-immobilier

Voir tout →

Servitude de passage et tierce opposition : protéger son droit d'accès en copropriété

Un copropriétaire peut-il s'opposer à la suppression d'une servitude de passage qui profite à son lot, même si le syndicat accepte la fin de l'enclave ? La Cour de cassation répond oui, reconnaissant un intérêt distinct pour agir en tierce opposition.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Enclave et servitude : quand le droit du travail ne crée pas de passage forcé

La Cour de cassation rappelle que l'état d'enclave d'un fonds ne peut résulter des obligations réglementaires imposées aux entreprises en matière d'issues et dégagements. Ainsi, un propriétaire ne peut exiger un passage sur le fonds voisin au seul motif que son bâtiment doit respecter des normes de sécurité incendie.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence de cette convention, les parties à un contrat de transport public routier de marchandises n'ont pas stipulé une durée de préavis de rupture, cette durée est fixée par un contrat-type approuvé par décret pris en application de l'article L. 1432-4 du code des transports. Les dispositions de l'article L. 442-6, I, 5°, devenu L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce ne trouvent alors pas à s'appliquer. Il en va de même lorsque la convention écrite renvoie expressément à la clause du contrat-type fixant une telle durée. Lorsque les parties ont conclu un contrat écrit stipulant la durée du préavis de rupture, les dispositions de l'article L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce sont applicables. Dans cette hypothèse, l'auteur de la rupture qui a consenti à son partenaire un délai de préavis au moins égal à celui prévu au contrat-type dans sa version en vigueur à la date de la notification de la rupture, ne saurait voir sa responsabilité engagée sur le fondement de ce texte

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Explorez plus d'analyses juridiques en droit droit-immobilier

Tous les articles Droit-immobilier
★★★★★4.9/5 — Avis Google

Maître Zakine, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45

🔒 Confidentiel • Sans engagement • Réponse rapide