The parties did not appeal the tie-breaking judgment.
The executive assistant of Rituals Cosmetics acknowledged the termination for non-payment of overtime, non-compliance with daily and weekly working hours, non-compliance with rest periods, non-compliance with the safety obligation.
The deciding judge rules that the acknowledgment produces the effects of a dismissal without cause.
The executive assistant is awarded 47,000 euros gross.
The tie-breaking judgment is final.
2.3.1) On salary arrears for overtime
Any hour worked beyond the legal weekly duration or the duration considered equivalent is an overtime hour that gives rise to a salary increase or, where applicable, to equivalent compensatory rest. Overtime is that which is worked at the request of the employer, or at least with his implicit agreement, beyond the legal working time as it results from Article L: 3121-27 of the Labor Code.
In the event of a dispute relating to the existence or number of hours worked, pursuant to Article L. 3171-4 of the Labor Code, it is up to the employee to present, in support of his claim, sufficiently precise evidence regarding the unpaid hours that he claims to have worked in order to allow the employer, who ensures the monitoring of the hours worked, to respond usefully by producing his own evidence. The judge forms his opinion by taking into account all of these elements in light of the requirements recalled in the legal and regulatory provisions.
In this case, Mrs. X is requesting back pay for 51.96 hours of unpaid structural overtime and for 438.11 hours of unpaid overtime for the period from October 2018 to March 2021.
2.3.2) On the so-called structural overtime.
Mrs. X is requesting a back pay of 1,319.78 euros for the overtime she worked between the 35th hour and the 39th hour, as well as payment of the related paid leave.
In support of her claim, she argues that the pay slips for the months of October, November and December 2018 indicate a working time of 151.68 hours for a salary of 3,083 euros, whereas she worked 169 hours per month.
The defendant company states that the three pay slips for the months of 2018 contain a material error on the working time, which was corrected as of 1 January 2019 by including two separate lines for the first 151.67 hours at a rate of 18.24 euros and for 17.77 overtime hours at an increased rate of 20.23 euros.
It follows from Article 6 of the employment contract that the parties agreed on a gross annual flat-rate remuneration of 37,000 euros for a schedule of 169 hours per month, or 3,083.33 euros for 39 hours per week.
Examination of the pay slips reveals that the company paid Mrs. X a salary of 3,083.33 euros in October, November and December 2018, corresponding to the agreed salary, such that the overtime hours "described as structural" were fully remunerated.
The employee's request for back pay will be dismissed.
On the 438.11 hours of overtime
Ms. X claims that the employer owes the sum of 11,669.67 euros in back pay for the 438.11 hours of overtime that she claims to have worked from October 2018 to March 2021, in addition to the sum of 1,166.96 euros in paid leave relating thereto.
In support of her claim, she produces the daily and weekly statements of her working hours, indicating her arrival and departure times from the company, as well as her break times for the period in question.
These statements are supplemented by numerous email exchanges between the employee and her employer from October 1, 2018 to March 28, 2021.
Thus, Mrs. X provides sufficiently precise evidence regarding the unpaid hours she claims to have worked in order to allow the employer, who monitors the hours worked, to respond usefully by producing its own evidence.
The defendant company alleges that the employee never requested prior authorization from her manager to work overtime, in accordance with the provisions of Article S of the employment contract, that the evidence provided by the employee is insufficiently convincing and that the employee's workload did not justify the work of overtime. However, it does not provide any evidence regarding the schedules and the calculation of working hours, while it is up to it to establish the evidence necessary to calculate the working time.
According to the statements produced, the employee generally started her working days at 9:30 a.m. and finished her day most often after 7:00 p.m., and sometimes late in the evening, with a one-hour break per day. The email exchanges produced by the employee attest that
work, that she sent emails to her contacts outside of normal working hours, particularly in the evening.
In light of these elements, the Council notes that Mrs. X worked overtime to a lesser extent than requested, the Council limiting itself to retaining the 108 days for which emails are produced in support of the hours mentioned in the tables produced by the employee.
The claim for payment of overtime should be partially upheld and RITUALS COSMETICS FRANCE ordered to pay the sum of EUR 5,000.00 gross for overtime and to pay the sum of EUR 500.00 gross for the related paid leave.
2.3.3) On the claim for damages for compensatory rest and on the claim for paid leave
In application of Article L. 3121-30 of the French Labor Code, the mandatory compensation in rest is due for any additional hour worked beyond the annual quota of overtime hours.
Mrs. X claims that she worked 199.58 hours of overtime beyond the annual quota of 220 hours for the year 2019 and 23h58 beyond the annual quota for the year 2020, for which she is claiming payment in the amount of 4,534.60 euros in addition to the related paid leave.
Having regard to the resolution of the dispute over overtime, the Council considers that the alleged excess has not been established, so that the claim for compensation in this respect is rejected, as is the claim for paid leave.
To read all the Article, please click on the link below
https://www.legavox.fr/blog/frederic-chhum-avocats/prise-acte-pour-paiement-heures-35891.htm
Frédéric CHHUM avocat et ancien membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)
CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)
e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com
https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr
.Paris: 34 rue Petrelle 75009 Paris tel: 0142560300
.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644
.Lille: : 45, Rue Saint Etienne 59000 Lille – Ligne directe +(33) 03.20.57.53.24
Pas de contribution, soyez le premier