The Macron Scale: Caps on Unfair Dismissal Damages and Legal Challenges in France (2025)
Introduction: the Macron scale, an essential framework in labour litigation
Introduced by the Macron Ordinances of 22 September 2017 and codified in Article L.1235-3 of the French Labour Code, the scale of compensation for dismissal without real and serious cause (licenciement sans cause réelle et sérieuse) is one of the most structural reforms of French labour law over the past decade. By setting floors and caps on employment-tribunal damages based on the employee’s length of service and the size of the company, this scale has profoundly changed the approach to dismissal litigation.
After years of judicial challenge, the French Court of Cassation (Cour de cassation, the highest civil court) definitively upheld the compliance of the scale on 11 May 2022, putting an end to the resistance of certain labour courts (conseils de prud’hommes). In 2025, the scale applies in a consolidated manner, but its exceptions, its case law and its calculation methods deserve a thorough analysis for HR professionals and payroll managers.
The full scale: floors and caps on damages
For companies with 11 or more employees
The scale sets minimum (floor) and maximum (cap) damages expressed in months of gross salary, according to the employee’s length of service in the company at the time the employment contract is terminated:
| Length of service (full years) | Minimum award (months) | Maximum award (months) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | None | 1 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 3 | 3.5 |
| 3 | 3 | 4 |
| 4 | 3 | 5 |
| 5 | 3 | 6 |
| 6 | 3 | 7 |
| 7 | 3 | 8 |
| 8 | 3 | 8 |
| 9 | 3 | 9 |
| 10 | 3 | 10 |
| 11 | 3 | 10.5 |
| 12 | 3 | 11 |
| 13 | 3 | 11.5 |
| 14 | 3 | 12 |
| 15 | 3 | 13 |
| 16 | 3 | 13.5 |
| 17 | 3 | 14 |
| 18 | 3 | 14.5 |
| 19 | 3 | 15 |
| 20 | 3 | 15.5 |
| 21 | 3 | 16 |
| 22 | 3 | 16.5 |
| 23 | 3 | 17 |
| 24 | 3 | 17.5 |
| 25 | 3 | 18 |
| 26 | 3 | 18.5 |
| 27 | 3 | 19 |
| 28 | 3 | 19.5 |
| 29 | 3 | 20 |
| 30 and above | 3 | 20 |
For companies with fewer than 11 employees
Companies with fewer than 11 employees benefit from reduced floors, recognising the lesser financial capacity of very small businesses:
| Length of service (full years) | Minimum award (months) |
|---|---|
| 0 | None |
| 1 | 0.5 |
| 2 | 0.5 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 4 | 1 |
| 5 | 1.5 |
| 6 | 1.5 |
| 7 | 2 |
| 8 | 2 |
| 9 | 2.5 |
| 10 and above | 2.5 |
The caps are identical to those for companies with 11 or more employees. Only the floors differ.
The calculation basis: the reference gross monthly salary
Two possible calculation methods
The reference salary used as the basis for calculating damages is determined using whichever formula is most favourable to the employee:
- The average of the last 12 months of gross salary preceding notification of the dismissal
- The average of the last 3 months of gross salary preceding notification of the dismissal (in which case exceptional or annual bonuses and gratuities are prorated)
The labour court automatically applies the formula most favourable to the employee. The remuneration elements taken into account include base salary, bonuses (seniority, 13th-month, performance targets), benefits in kind and regular overtime.
Items excluded from the calculation
Excluded from the calculation basis are reimbursements of professional expenses, severance pay, sums paid under profit-sharing (participation) and incentive schemes (intéressement), as well as compensatory indemnities for paid leave and notice period (which are due in addition to the compensation for dismissal without real and serious cause).
Exceptions to the scale: cases where the dismissal is null and void
Situations outside the scale
The Macron scale does not apply where the dismissal is null and void (nul). The cases of nullity, exhaustively listed by law, allow the employee to obtain compensation without a cap, with a minimum of 6 months’ salary (Article L.1235-3-1 of the French Labour Code). The main cases of nullity are:
- Discrimination (Article L.1132-4): dismissal based on origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, family situation, pregnancy, genetic characteristics, membership or non-membership of an ethnic group, a nation or a so-called race, political opinions, trade-union or mutualist activities, religious beliefs, physical appearance, surname, place of residence, state of health, loss of autonomy or disability
- Moral or sexual harassment (Articles L.1152-2 and L.1153-2)
- Infringement of a fundamental freedom: freedom of expression, right to strike, freedom of association
- Breach of a specific protection: protected employees (staff representatives), pregnant employees, employees on leave for a work accident or occupational illness, whistleblowers
Compensation in cases of nullity
Where the dismissal is null and void, the employee may request reinstatement in the company. If reinstatement is not requested, or if it is impossible, the employee is entitled to compensation that may not be less than the salary for the last 6 months. This compensation is uncapped, and the court has sovereign discretion to set its amount, taking into account the loss actually suffered by the employee.
Consolidated case law: validation by the Court of Cassation
The judgment of 11 May 2022: a decisive turning point
By two judgments handed down in plenary session on 11 May 2022 (appeals no. 21-14.490 and no. 21-15.247), the Social Chamber of the Court of Cassation definitively ruled that the Macron scale is compliant with Article 10 of ILO Convention No. 158 (International Labour Organization) and Article 24 of the European Social Charter.
The Court held that the scale allows, in all cases, “adequate” compensation within the meaning of ILO Convention No. 158, and that the provisions of the European Social Charter do not have direct effect in French law, so that they cannot be invoked by litigants before national courts to set aside the application of the scale.
The end of resistance by the labour courts
Before this judgment, many labour courts had resisted by setting aside the scale, considering that it did not allow adequate reparation of the loss in certain individual situations. The labour courts of Troyes, Amiens, Lyon, Grenoble and Paris, in particular, had rendered decisions setting aside the scale in favour of case-by-case (in concreto) compensation.
The judgment of 11 May 2022 put an end to this resistance by clearly establishing that the scale cannot be set aside by trial judges, even on a case-by-case basis. This position has been confirmed by numerous subsequent decisions of the courts of appeal, which have systematically overturned first-instance judgments setting aside the scale.
Constitutional compliance confirmed by the Council of State
The Council of State (Conseil d’État, France’s highest administrative court) had already validated the scale’s compliance with constitutional and treaty standards in a judgment of 7 December 2017. It held that the scale did not infringe the principle of equality before the law, nor the right to an effective judicial remedy, nor the principle of full reparation of loss (which does not have constitutional status in dismissal matters).
Litigation strategy for the employer
Securing the dismissal upstream
The Macron scale offers employers predictability of litigation costs which should be integrated into human resources management strategy. Before any dismissal, it is recommended to:
- Verify the absence of grounds for nullity: ensure that the dismissal cannot be characterised as discriminatory, connected to harassment, or infringing a fundamental freedom
- Calculate the maximum exposure: determine the applicable compensation cap based on the employee’s length of service
- Document rigorously: build a solid file demonstrating the real and serious cause of the dismissal
- Assess the appropriateness of a mutually agreed termination: in certain cases, a rupture conventionnelle (mutually agreed termination of the employment contract) may be preferable to a contentious dismissal
Settlement negotiation in light of the scale
The scale has profoundly changed the practice of settlement negotiation. Settlement indemnities now generally fall within the range of the scale, as employees have lost the leverage previously provided by the judicial uncertainty of high awards. For the employer, offering a settlement indemnity close to the scale’s cap often constitutes a credible offer that avoids the costs and uncertainties of employment-tribunal proceedings.
Impact on accounting provisions
For payroll managers and finance directors, the Macron scale facilitates the accounting provisioning of labour disputes. The maximum financial risk is now quantifiable with precision, which improves the reliability of the accounts and simplifies exchanges with statutory auditors and external auditors.
Indemnities that can be combined with the scale
It is important to remember that the compensation for dismissal without real and serious cause (the Macron scale) is cumulative with other indemnities:
- Statutory or contractual severance pay (Article L.1234-9 of the French Labour Code)
- Compensatory indemnity in lieu of notice
- Compensatory indemnity for paid leave
- Damages for failure to comply with the dismissal procedure (limited to 1 month’s salary, Article L.1235-2)
- Salary arrears (overtime, bonuses, etc.)
The total cost of a dismissal successfully challenged before the labour court may therefore significantly exceed the Macron scale’s cap alone. Employers must incorporate all of these components into their assessment of litigation risk.
Prospects for the evolution of the scale
Proposed revisions
Despite its judicial validation, the Macron scale continues to attract criticism from legal scholars and trade unions. Several bills have been tabled to raise the floors, remove the caps, or exclude certain categories of employees (in particular employees over 55 or employees with a disability). To date, none of these proposals has succeeded.
The influence of European law
The European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) has issued observations on the compliance of the French scale with the European Social Charter. While the Court of Cassation has ruled that the Charter does not have direct effect, developments in European case law could, in time, compel the French legislature to review the mechanism. HR professionals should remain attentive to these developments.
FAQ: Your questions about the Macron scale
Does the Macron scale apply in the event of dismissal for gross misconduct?
The scale applies only where the court reclassifies the dismissal as being without real and serious cause. If the court finds that gross misconduct (faute grave) is established, the employee is entitled to no compensation under the scale (neither severance pay nor payment in lieu of notice). Conversely, if the court sets aside the gross misconduct and rules the dismissal to be without real and serious cause, the scale applies in full.
Can a judge still set aside the scale in 2025?
Since the Court of Cassation judgments of 11 May 2022, trial judges can no longer set aside the scale. If a labour court were to award compensation exceeding the cap, that decision would be overturned on appeal or in cassation. However, the scale does not apply where the dismissal is null and void (discrimination, harassment, infringement of a fundamental freedom, etc.).
How is length of service calculated for the scale?
Length of service is assessed in full years as at the date of notification of the dismissal (and not as at the date the notice period ends). Periods of contract suspension (illness, parental leave, etc.) are taken into account according to the usual rules. Where length of service is incomplete, the scale provides intermediate values for the length-of-service bands expressed in full years.
Does the scale apply to challenged mutually agreed terminations?
No, the Macron scale applies only to dismissal without real and serious cause. If a rupture conventionnelle is annulled by the court, the consequences depend on the grounds for annulment. If the mutually agreed termination produces the effects of a dismissal without real and serious cause, the scale could apply. However, if the annulment is based on a defect in consent (duress, fraud), compensation falls under ordinary law.
Is the scale applicable to protected employees?
The dismissal of a protected employee carried out in breach of the administrative authorisation procedure is null and void, not merely without real and serious cause. In this case, the scale does not apply and the employee may claim a minimum indemnity of 6 months’ salary, without a cap. Conversely, if the dismissal of a protected employee is authorised by the labour inspector but ruled to be without real and serious cause, the scale applies.