On January 21, 2025, the Court of Cassation dismissed the appeals of Didier Lombard, former CEO of France Télécom, and his deputy, Louis-Pierre Wenès, making their convictions final in the case of suicides linked to the company’s management policies.
The facts: A corporate policy with severe human consequences
The CEO and several company executives had implemented a drastic corporate policy aimed at massively reducing staff while imposing forced internal mobility. These measures led to a significant deterioration in the working conditions of the affected employees, resulting in considerable stress, job insecurity, and general malaise within the company.
The union, representing part of the affected workforce, filed a complaint, arguing that this corporate policy constituted institutional moral harassment, a form of systemic psychological violence exerted on all employees by the management.
The Court of Appeal: Holding executives accountable for institutional moral harassment
The Court of Appeal upheld the union’s arguments by convicting the company and its top executives of institutional moral harassment. The court relied on Article 222-33-2 of the Penal Code, which defines and punishes moral harassment at work. This article specifically targets behaviors that seriously degrade working conditions, thereby compromising employees’ dignity, physical, and mental health.
The court held that the company’s executives, by knowingly implementing a degrading and systematic policy, had created a harmful work environment amounting to institutional moral harassment.
The Court of Cassation: A decisive ruling
The Court of Cassation, hearing the case, upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, providing crucial clarifications on the application of the law regarding workplace moral harassment.
The main issue was whether executives could be convicted for implementing a general corporate policy that could be classified as moral harassment, even if it did not involve repeated individual acts toward specific victims.
The Court of Cassation ruled that institutional moral harassment fits the definition provided by the Penal Code, which states that moral harassment does not need to manifest through repeated actions against a specific victim. It is sufficient if the actions occur within a collective framework.
Thus, executives, by applying a general policy that severely worsens working conditions, are responsible for institutional moral harassment, even if it does not involve direct interpersonal relationships between the perpetrators and the victims.
This decision sets an important precedent for employees and unions, who can now rely on this case law to combat institutional moral harassment within companies.
For any questions regarding the protection of your rights, particularly in matters of workplace moral harassment, Maître DAMY, Labor Law Attorney in Nice, is available to provide advice and assistance. Feel free to contact us for any inquiries or consultations.
