Drink or climb, you have to choose!

Is the termination of an employee’s employment contract justified if the letter of dismissal accused him of having worked with a “higher than normal blood alcohol level“, when in fact he was “intoxicated“?

In the facts, a worker was victim of a work accident while he was on a construction site, in that he fell from a truck’s bucket on which he had been stationed to carry out his missions.

A blood alcohol test was then carried out by the gendarmerie, and proved to be positive.

In the letter notifying the dismissal, he was accused of having performed work at height “with a blood alcohol level higher than normal“.

Dismissed for gross misconduct on August 3, 2017, the interested party brought an action before the industrial tribunal to contest the termination.

However, the Court of Appeal found that the complaint was well-founded, on the grounds that the company had provided evidence that the employee was working at heights in a “state of intoxication“, which was contrary to the “rules prescribed by the internal regulations“.

However, the Court of Cassation censured the decision, recalling the strict nature of the rule that the letter of dismissal must set the limits of the dispute: “the complaint of performing work at height while intoxicated, a fact not covered by the letter of dismissal and whereas this document only referred to the facts of performing work at height with a blood alcohol level above normal.

In short, the employer must be specific about the alleged grievance in order to claim a violation of the internal regulations.

While such jurisprudence calls for caution, it is nevertheless dismayingbecause the difference between a “blood alcohol level above normal”. and a “state of drunkenness” is a matter of semantics, in addition to the fact that the result remains the same: the employee being under the influence of alcohol, he has placed himself in violation of the rules imposed on him, justifying that a sanction be pronounced against him.

But with this new absurd decision, the Court of Cassation sends a clear message: act according to your wishes, even if it means putting your life in danger, we will always be there to compensate you.

 

Cass. soc., 8 March 2023, 21-25.678

You may also be interested in this news
News by NMCG – July & August 2023
News By NMCG
News by NMCG - July & August 2023
The mobility clause: no infringement of the employee’s fundamental right to personal and family life
Article
The mobility clause: no infringement of the employee's fundamental right to personal and family life
Employees may not be heard as part of an expert appraisal commissioned by the CSE without the employer’s express agreement.
Article
Employees may not be heard as part of an expert appraisal commissioned by the CSE without the employer's express agreement.
An employee’s preliminary interview may be conducted by the authorized manager of another company in the same group.
Article
An employee's preliminary interview may be conducted by the authorized manager of another company in the same group.
NMCG Avocats assists the Valmen Group in its acquisition of Vivei
Press release
NMCG Avocats assists the Valmen Group in its acquisition of Vivei
Lawyer profile: Arnaud Blanc de la Naulte
Inside NMCG
Lawyer profile: Arnaud Blanc de la Naulte
How should alcohol advertising be regulated?
Article
How should alcohol advertising be regulated?
Substitution clauses in promises to sell are unenforceable […].
Article
Substitution clauses in promises to sell are unenforceable [...].
Mass poaching of a competitor’s staff constitutes an act of unfair competition […].
Article
Mass poaching of a competitor's staff constitutes an act of unfair competition [...].
The value-sharing bill
Article
The value-sharing bill
The journey from the hotel to the employee’s place of work does not constitute actual working time.
Article
The journey from the hotel to the employee's place of work does not constitute actual working time.
The presumption of resignation for abandonment of post has not finished making headlines
Article
The presumption of resignation for abandonment of post has not finished making headlines
Nullity of dismissal: reinstatement possible for an employee who abandons his request for judicial termination
Article
Nullity of dismissal: reinstatement possible for an employee who abandons his request for judicial termination
The criminal conviction of an employee who has disturbed the smooth running of the company […].
Article
The criminal conviction of an employee who has disturbed the smooth running of the company [...].
News by NMCG – June 2023
News By NMCG
News by NMCG - June 2023
An employee declared unfit for work may be dismissed for misconduct if he or she hinders redeployment.
Article
An employee declared unfit for work may be dismissed for misconduct if he or she hinders redeployment.
The Distinctions