Strike Notice in Transport: National Representativeness Not Sufficient

Imagine: you are in Dax, waiting for a bus to go to work, and suddenly a strike movement paralyses the network. You learn that the strike notice was filed by a national union, but that union is not representative within the local company. Is the strike lawful? This question, which may seem technical, has direct consequences on your daily life and on the validity of strikes in public transport. The French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) has just answered it clearly on 5 February 2025 (n° 22-24.601).

In essence, the High Court ruled that, in public passenger transport companies, only a trade union that is representative within the company concerned can file a strike notice. A union that is representative at national level but not in the company cannot do so. This decision puts an end to legal uncertainty and protects both employers and users.

But what exactly does this change for you, as the owner of a shop in Capbreton or a user of the Landes buses? And how should you react if you are faced with an irregular strike notice? We will analyse this decision together, with concrete examples.

The facts: a story like those that happen every day

In March 2022, the CGT Transport Federation filed a strike notice effective from 10 March 2022 within the company Keolis, which operates public passenger transport services. The union is representative at national level, but it is not representative within Keolis. Keolis challenged the validity of this strike notice before the urgent applications judge (juge des référés), arguing that it was irregular and caused a manifestly unlawful disturbance (i.e., an obvious violation of the law).

The Court of Appeal, hearing the urgent application, ruled in favour of the union: it held that the strike notice was valid because national representativeness was sufficient. Keolis appealed to the Supreme Court. On 5 February 2025, the Supreme Court quashed the Court of Appeal's decision: it held that the Court of Appeal had misinterpreted the texts. Indeed, Articles L. 2512-2 of the Labour Code and L. 1222-7, L. 1324-2, L. 1324-5, 7°, L. 1324-10 of the Transport Code require prior negotiation between the employer and the representative trade union organisations in the company before a strike notice is filed. Only those organisations can file a strike notice. Since the union was not representative in the company, the strike notice was invalid, and therefore the alleged disturbance (hindrance to the right to strike) was not established.

The reasoning of the court — explained

The Supreme Court relies on a combination of articles from the Labour Code and the Transport Code. Article L. 2512-2 of the Labour Code (which concerns the right to strike in public services) provides that the strike notice must come from a representative trade union organisation. The articles of the Transport Code specify that, in public transport companies, the strike notice can only be filed after prior negotiation with the employer. The purpose of this negotiation is to try to reach an agreement and avoid the strike.

In other words, the legislature intended that social dialogue should take place as close to the ground as possible. A national union, even if representative, cannot impose a strike in a company where it has no representatives. What few people know is that this rule aims to avoid 'wildcat' or 'imported' strikes that do not take into account local realities.

In this case, the Court of Appeal had held that national representativeness was sufficient, but the Supreme Court contradicts it: it recalls that the text requires representativeness within the company. This is a confirmation of previous case law, but with strict application. The judges emphasise that, without this condition, the strike notice is void and cannot serve as a basis for a lawful strike. In short, if a union that is not representative in the company files a strike notice, employees who go on strike on that basis may be considered to be on an unlawful strike, with all the disciplinary consequences that entails.

What this changes for you — concretely

For you, as the owner of a shop in Capbreton, this decision means that you can challenge a transport strike if the strike notice was filed by a union that is not representative in the local transport company. For example, if the national CGT files a strike notice for the buses of the Communauté d'agglomération du Grand Dax, but the CGT does not have a union branch in that company, the strike notice is invalid. You can then apply to the urgent applications judge to stop the disturbance.

If you are an employer in the transport sector (like Keolis or a municipal undertaking), you must systematically check the representativeness of the union that files a strike notice. An irregular strike notice may allow you to obtain damages for the loss suffered (e.g., loss of turnover). In practice, if you are in this situation, you should: 1) ask the union to provide evidence of its representativeness in the company; 2) in the absence of evidence, apply to the judicial court (tribunal judiciaire) by way of summary proceedings to have the irregularity declared.

For users, such as residents of Dax who take the bus every day, this decision strengthens legal certainty: a strike triggered on an irregular strike notice can be suspended more quickly. However, note that someone must challenge it. undefined, I have come across cases where traders suffered significant losses due to strikes whose strike notice was irregular, simply because they did not act in time.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Check the union's representativeness: before filing a strike notice, ensure that your union is representative in the company (presence of union branches, results of professional elections). Do not rely on national representativeness.
• Negotiate before filing: the law requires prior negotiation. Even if you are representative, you must attempt negotiation with the employer before filing the strike notice. Keep written records of this attempt.
• As an employer, require proof: upon receipt of a strike notice, ask the union to prove its representativeness in the company. If it cannot, you can challenge the strike notice by way of summary proceedings.
• As a user or trader, report the irregularity: if you suffer from a strike that you believe is irregular, inform the employer and/or your lawyer. An urgent application can be made quickly to stop the movement.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This decision is part of a line of restrictive case law concerning the right to strike in public transport. Already in 2019, the Supreme Court had ruled (n° 18-14.876) that the strike notice must be filed by an organisation representative in the company. The present decision confirms and clarifies this point. However, it contradicts a more liberal trend in some Courts of Appeal, which accepted national representativeness. The rule is now clear: representativeness in the company is mandatory. In the future, we can expect courts to be stricter on the regularity of strike notices, and employers to increase challenges. Unions will therefore have to adapt their strategy and favour local branches.

Checklist before acting

FAQ:

1. Can a national union file a strike notice in a transport company? No, if it is not representative in the company. Only a union representative in the company can do so.
2. What should I do if I receive an irregular strike notice? Apply to the urgent applications judge to have the irregularity declared and request the suspension of the strike. Act quickly, as the strike may be imminent.
3. What are the risks for employees who go on strike on the basis of an irregular strike notice? They may be considered to be on an unlawful strike, which exposes them to disciplinary sanctions (suspension, dismissal).
4. Does this decision apply to all public transport? Yes, to undertakings providing regular land passenger transport (buses, metro, tramways, etc.).
5. Can I challenge a past strike? Yes, if you have suffered loss, you can claim damages from the employer or the union, but you must prove that the strike notice was irregular and that you suffered direct loss.

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