The Macron Scale in 2025: Caps on Labour Court Damages and How to Manage Litigation Risk
Introduction: the Macron scale, an essential framework for labour court 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 structuring reforms of French labour law of the past decade. By setting floors and ceilings for labour court (prud’hommes) damages according to 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 Cour de cassation (French Supreme Court for civil and labour matters) definitively upheld the scale’s validity on 11 May 2022, ending the resistance of certain labour courts. In 2025 the scale applies in a consolidated manner, but its exceptions, case law and calculation methods deserve close analysis for the benefit of HR professionals and payroll managers.
The full scale: floors and ceilings for damages
For companies with 11 employees or more
The scale sets minimum (floor) and maximum (ceiling) 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 damages (months) | Maximum damages (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, in recognition of the lower financial capacity of very small businesses:
| Length of service (full years) | Minimum damages (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 ceilings are identical to those for companies with 11 employees or more. Only the floors differ.
The basis of calculation: the reference gross monthly salary
Two possible calculation methods
The reference salary used as the basis for calculating damages is determined according to 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 elements of remuneration 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 basis of calculation are reimbursements of professional expenses, the severance indemnity, 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 damages for dismissal without real and serious cause).
Exceptions to the scale: cases where dismissal is null and void
Situations outside the scale
The Macron scale does not apply where the dismissal is null and void (nul). The grounds of nullity, exhaustively listed by law, allow the employee to obtain compensation with no ceiling, with a minimum of 6 months’ salary (Article L.1235-3-1 of the French Labour Code). The main grounds 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, nation or purported 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, the right to strike, trade union freedom
- Breach of a specific protection: protected employee (staff representative), pregnant employee, employee on leave following a workplace accident or occupational illness, whistleblower
Compensation in cases of nullity
Where the dismissal is null and void, the employee may request reinstatement in the company. If the employee does not request reinstatement, or if reinstatement is impossible, they are entitled to damages that cannot be less than the salary of the last 6 months. These damages are not capped, and the court has sovereign discretion to set the amount, taking into account the harm actually suffered by the employee.
Consolidated case law: validation by the Cour de cassation
The 11 May 2022 ruling: a decisive turning point
By two rulings handed down in plenary session on 11 May 2022 (appeals no. 21-14.490 and no. 21-15.247), the Social Chamber of the Cour de cassation definitively held that the Macron scale is compliant with Article 10 of Convention No. 158 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and with 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 have no 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 ruling, many labour courts had resisted by setting the scale aside, considering that it did not allow adequate compensation for the harm suffered in certain individual situations. The labour courts of Troyes, Amiens, Lyon, Grenoble and Paris, in particular, had handed down decisions setting the scale aside in favour of compensation assessed in concreto.
The 11 May 2022 ruling put an end to this resistance by clearly establishing that the scale cannot be set aside by the courts of first instance, 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 the scale aside.
Constitutional conformity confirmed by the Conseil d’État
The Conseil d’État (France’s highest administrative court) had already validated the scale’s conformity with constitutional and treaty norms in a ruling of 7 December 2017. It held that the scale did not infringe the principle of equality before the law, the right to an effective judicial remedy, or the principle of full compensation for harm (which does not have constitutional status in dismissal matters).
Litigation strategy for the employer
Securing the dismissal upstream
The Macron scale offers employers a predictability of litigation cost that should be factored into human resources management strategy. Before any dismissal, it is advisable to:
- Check the absence of any ground of 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 ceiling 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 rupture conventionnelle: in some cases, a rupture conventionnelle (mutually agreed termination) may be preferable to a contentious dismissal
Settlement negotiation in light of the scale
The scale has profoundly changed the practice of settlement negotiation (transaction). Settlement indemnities now generally fall within the range of the scale, since employees have lost the leverage previously provided by the judicial uncertainty of high damages awards. For the employer, offering a settlement indemnity close to the scale’s ceiling is often a credible offer that avoids the costs and uncertainties of labour court proceedings.
The impact on accounting provisions
For payroll managers and finance directors, the Macron scale facilitates the accounting provisioning of labour court disputes. The maximum financial risk is now quantifiable with precision, which improves the reliability of the accounts and simplifies discussions with statutory auditors and auditors.
Indemnities that can be combined with the scale
It is important to recall that the damages for dismissal without real and serious cause (Macron scale) are cumulative with other indemnities:
- The statutory or contractual severance indemnity (Article L.1234-9 of the French Labour Code)
- The compensatory indemnity in lieu of notice
- The compensatory indemnity for paid leave
- Damages for failure to comply with the dismissal procedure (capped at 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 can therefore significantly exceed the Macron scale ceiling alone. Employers must factor in all these components when assessing litigation risk.
Prospects for the scale’s evolution
Proposals for reform
Despite its validation in case law, the Macron scale continues to be the subject of academic and trade union criticism. Several bills have been tabled to raise the floors, remove the ceilings or exclude certain categories of employee (in particular employees over 55 or employees with a disability). To date, none of these proposals has been enacted.
The influence of European law
The European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) has issued observations on the conformity of the French scale with the European Social Charter. While the Cour de cassation has held that the Charter has no direct effect, developments in European case law could, in time, compel the French legislator to review the mechanism. HR professionals should remain attentive to these developments.
FAQ: Your questions on the Macron scale
Does the Macron scale apply in the event of dismissal for gross misconduct?
The scale applies only where the court re-characterises the dismissal as being without real and serious cause. If the court finds that gross misconduct (faute grave) is established, the employee is not entitled to any compensation under the scale (neither severance indemnity nor notice indemnity). Conversely, if the court rejects gross misconduct and rules the dismissal to be without real and serious cause, the scale applies in full.
Can a court still set aside the scale in 2025?
Since the Cour de cassation rulings of 11 May 2022, courts of first instance can no longer set aside the scale. If a labour court were to award damages exceeding the ceiling, that decision would be overturned on appeal or in cassation. However, the scale does not apply in cases of nullity of the dismissal (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 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 brackets 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. Conversely, if the annulment is based on a defect of consent (duress, fraudulent misrepresentation), compensation falls under the ordinary law of damages.
Does the scale apply to protected employees?
The dismissal of a protected employee pronounced in breach of the administrative authorisation procedure is null and void, and not merely without real and serious cause. In this case the scale does not apply and the employee may claim minimum damages of 6 months’ salary, with no ceiling. 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.