You hired your first employee in France with enthusiasm, and a few months later the relationship has broken down: repeated absences, missed targets, a loss of trust, or simply a role that no longer matches the needs of the company. You live in London, New York, Dubai or Singapore, and you wonder whether you can end the contract with a phone call and a final payment. The short answer is no. France does not know dismissal at will. Every dismissal of an employee on a CDI (contrat à durée indéterminée, the open-ended permanent employment contract that is the default form of employment in France) must rest on a real and serious cause, follow a strict invitation, meeting and notification sequence, and survive review by the conseil de prud’hommes (the elected French labour court that hears individual employment disputes). Mistakes do not cancel each other out: a weak reason and a missed deadline each cost money. This guide explains, for a foreign founder or director managing from abroad, how to dismiss lawfully, how much the exit costs, and where the labour court risk really sits.
I. How to dismiss your first French employee lawfully while you live abroad
A. Why you cannot simply fire at will: real and serious cause, invitation letter, preliminary meeting and dismissal letter sent from abroad
French law starts from a principle that surprises many foreign employers: the dismissal letter, not the employer’s later explanations, defines the dispute. The Labour Code states that “Lorsque l’employeur décide de licencier un salarié, il lui notifie sa décision par lettre recommandée avec avis de réception. Cette lettre comporte l’énoncé du ou des motifs invoqués par l’employeur. Elle ne peut être expédiée moins de deux jours ouvrables après la date prévue de l’entretien préalable au licenciement auquel le salarié a été convoqué.” In plain English, the employer notifies dismissal by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt, states the reasons in that letter, and waits at least two full working days after the scheduled preliminary meeting before posting it. The Cour de cassation (the supreme court for civil and criminal matters, whose social chamber hears final appeals in employment cases) draws a severe consequence from this rule. In a published judgment of 23 October 2024, appeal number 22-22.206, it held that “Il résulte de ces textes que la lettre de licenciement fixe les limites du litige en ce qui concerne les griefs articulés à l’encontre du salarié et que le juge a l’obligation d’examiner l’ensemble des griefs invoqués dans la lettre de licenciement.” Every complaint listed in the letter must be examined by the judge, and anything missing from the letter generally cannot be added later, except through the narrow clarification procedure described below. A vague letter invoking personality differences or a loss of confidence, without precise dated facts, exposes the dismissal to a finding of no real and serious cause.
Before that letter, the employer must organise a preliminary meeting (entretien préalable). The Code provides that “L’employeur qui envisage de licencier un salarié le convoque, avant toute décision, à un entretien préalable. La convocation est effectuée par lettre recommandée ou par lettre remise en main propre contre décharge. Cette lettre indique l’objet de la convocation. L’entretien préalable ne peut avoir lieu moins de cinq jours ouvrables après la présentation de la lettre recommandée ou la remise en main propre de la lettre de convocation.” Five full working days (Monday to Saturday excluding Sundays and public holidays) must separate presentation of the invitation from the meeting. During the hearing, the employee may bring support: “Lors de son audition, le salarié peut se faire assister par une personne de son choix appartenant au personnel de l’entreprise.” Where the young company has no staff representative body, which is the normal situation with a single employee, the invitation must mention the right to be assisted by an outside staff adviser (conseiller du salarié) chosen from a list held by the local administration, with the address where that list is available. Omitting that mention when there is no elected body is a procedural fault that costs money even when the dismissal itself is justified.
Managing this sequence from abroad requires organisation, not improvisation. The invitation and the dismissal letter must be sent by lettre recommandée avec accusé de réception (registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt, the only postal form that proves both sending and delivery dates) to the employee’s home in France, ideally through a French online registered-letter service that provides electronic proof of posting, or through a person holding a written mandate in France. The preliminary meeting must take place in person, normally at the workplace or a nearby venue; holding it by video call without the employee’s clear agreement is risky because the employee can argue that the right to be heard and assisted was impaired. Many foreign founders give a written power of attorney to a local manager, an external human-resources provider, or their French counsel to conduct the meeting, present the employer’s observations, and listen to the employee’s explanations. The person who signs the letters should be the legal representative of the French employing entity or a delegate with a written delegation of powers, because the employee can challenge the authority of the signatory. Calendar discipline matters: five working days before the meeting, then at least two working days between the meeting date and the posting of the dismissal letter. Posting one day early can convert a justified dismissal into an irregular one.
Two evidentiary points deserve emphasis for a first hire. First, performance-based dismissal (insuffisance professionnelle) demands a paper trail: job description, quantified targets communicated in writing, prior warnings or performance reviews, training offered, and support measures. Judges distinguish documented underperformance from a mere disappointment. Second, retaliation arguments are common: an employee who recently complained about overtime, pay, or working conditions will argue that the dismissal punishes the complaint. The Cour de cassation recalled on 26 February 2025, appeal number 23-13.552, that “Lorsque les faits invoqués dans la lettre de licenciement caractérisent une cause réelle et sérieuse de licenciement, il appartient au salarié de démontrer que la rupture de son contrat de travail constitue une mesure de rétorsion à une action en justice introduite pour faire valoir ses droits.” Where the stated facts genuinely show a real and serious cause, the employee must prove retaliation for legal action taken to assert rights. That allocation of proof helps the employer, but only when the facts in the letter are established and serious. Keep every payslip, time record, email warning, and meeting note, because the labour court decides on documents, not on recollections from abroad.
B. Misconduct, serious cause and the two-month clock: choosing the disciplinary track without losing the case on time limits
When the problem is behaviour rather than performance, French law offers a disciplinary ladder, but each rung has its own deadline. The starting point is the two-month rule: “Aucun fait fautif ne peut donner lieu à lui seul à l’engagement de poursuites disciplinaires au-delà d’un délai de deux mois à compter du jour où l’employeur en a eu connaissance, à moins que ce fait ait donné lieu dans le même délai à l’exercice de poursuites pénales.” No misconduct known to the employer for more than two months can alone justify starting a disciplinary case, unless criminal proceedings were opened within that period. For a founder living abroad, knowledge means knowledge by a person with disciplinary authority, typically the manager in France or the founder once informed with enough detail to act. Sitting on a serious incident for ten weeks while travelling, then invoking it as gross misconduct, fails on timing alone. The practical reflex is to date-stamp every report: when the facts were learned, by whom, and what step was taken within days.
Once the disciplinary route is chosen, the meeting follows the sanction procedure. The employer summons the employee, states the purpose, hears the explanations with the chosen companion present, and then must respect a window: “La sanction ne peut intervenir moins de deux jours ouvrables, ni plus d’un mois après le jour fixé pour l’entretien. Elle est motivée et notifiée à l’intéressé.” The sanction, including a disciplinary dismissal, cannot be imposed sooner than two working days after the scheduled meeting nor later than one month after it, and it must be reasoned and notified. A dismissal letter posted six weeks after the meeting for the same facts is late, even if the underlying misconduct was real. Where new misconduct occurs after the meeting, it can support a fresh procedure, but it cannot silently extend the expired one. Keep the two tracks distinct in your files: one procedure, one set of facts, one calendar.
The classification of misconduct drives the cost of the exit. French practice distinguishes simple misconduct (faute simple), serious misconduct (faute grave) and wilful misconduct (faute lourde, which requires an intent to harm the employer). Serious misconduct is conduct that makes continued employment impossible, even during the notice period: theft, violence, prolonged unjustified absence, disclosure of confidential data, or refusal to follow a lawful core instruction. Its effect is to deprive the employee of statutory severance and of notice compensation, as the Code confirms for notice pay: “Lorsque le salarié n’exécute pas le préavis, il a droit, sauf s’il a commis une faute grave, à une indemnité compensatrice.” Wilful misconduct adds a possible damages claim against the employee but demands proof of harmful intent, which courts apply strictly. A foreign employer should resist labelling every conflict as serious misconduct. Judges reclassify inflated cases, restore severance and notice rights, and draw adverse conclusions about the employer’s good faith. A paid precautionary suspension (mise à pied conservatoire) pending the outcome is possible for serious cases, but an unpaid disciplinary suspension for the same facts followed by dismissal for those facts amounts to double punishment and destroys the case. One fact pattern, one sanction: if dismissal is the answer, suspend with pay while the procedure runs, then dismiss once, with reasons that match the evidence.
Harassment, discrimination and protected-status traps surround the disciplinary track and matter greatly for a first hire managed remotely. Dismissing an employee shortly after a complaint about moral harassment, a request linked to pregnancy or parental leave, or testimony in another employee’s case invites a nullity claim, where compensation is not capped by the standard scale. Verify before acting whether the employee holds any protection: pregnancy, maternity or paternity leave periods, employee-representative mandate, or occupational illness procedures each carry special authorisation or timing rules. From abroad, ask your French payroll provider and counsel for a protection check before sending any invitation: five minutes of verification avoids a dismissal declared void with a minimum of six months’ salary in damages. Similarly, never cite the employee’s health, private life, union sympathies, or origin, even indirectly, in the invitation or the letter. A single discriminatory sentence can poison an otherwise solid file. Stick to dated professional facts, attach the supporting documents to your internal file, and quote only what you can prove at the hearing in Paris, Lyon, or wherever the competent conseil de prud’hommes sits.
II. What ending the contract costs and how the labour court punishes mistakes
A. Severance pay, notice period and paid leave: calculating the exit bill before you sign the letter
Every dismissal budget starts with three lines: statutory severance (indemnité légale de licenciement), notice compensation (indemnité compensatrice de préavis) where the employee does not work the notice, and accrued paid-leave compensation (indemnité compensatrice de congés payés). A fourth line, the applicable convention collective (the industry-wide collective bargaining agreement that sets minimum employment terms for the sector), often raises the bill above the legal floor, so identify the correct agreement from the company’s activity code before computing anything. The legal floor for severance belongs to employees with sufficient service: “Le salarié titulaire d’un contrat de travail à durée indéterminée, licencié alors qu’il compte 8 mois d’ancienneté ininterrompus au service du même employeur, a droit, sauf en cas de faute grave, à une indemnité de licenciement.” Below eight months of continuous service, no statutory severance is due, unless the convention collective grants one; at or above eight months, severance is owed except in cases of serious or wilful misconduct. The computation counts complete years plus extra months: “L’indemnité de licenciement prévue à l’article L. 1234-9 ne peut être inférieure à une somme calculée par année de service dans l’entreprise et tenant compte des mois de service accomplis au-delà des années pleines.” The reference salary is generally the most favourable of the average of the last twelve months or the last three months, including bonuses pro rata, which means a recent raise or a quarterly bonus moves the figure.
The rate itself is fixed by regulation: “L’indemnité de licenciement ne peut être inférieure aux montants suivants : 1° Un quart de mois de salaire par année d’ancienneté pour les années jusqu’à dix ans ; 2° Un tiers de mois de salaire par année d’ancienneté pour les années à partir de dix ans.” One quarter of a month’s salary per year of service for the first ten years, one third per year beyond ten years. For a first hire with two years of service and a reference salary of 3,500 euros gross per month, the floor equals roughly 1,750 euros. With four years at 4,000 euros, it reaches 4,000 euros. These amounts look modest, which misleads some foreign employers into thinking dismissal is cheap. The real exposure lies elsewhere: notice, leave, and above all the damages for dismissal without real and serious cause. Notice length (préavis) depends on seniority and on the convention collective, commonly one to three months for non-managerial staff and three months or more for managers (cadres). Where the employer releases the employee from working the notice, the compensation equals the salary and benefits, including paid-leave accrual, that would have been earned: the rule that “Lorsque le salarié n’exécute pas le préavis, il a droit, sauf s’il a commis une faute grave, à une indemnité compensatrice.” applies symmetrically, and the same provision adds that the exemption ordered by the employer causes no loss of wages or benefits. Unused paid leave is then converted into money because “Lorsque le contrat de travail est rompu avant que le salarié ait pu bénéficier de la totalité du congé auquel il avait droit, il reçoit, pour la fraction de congé dont il n’a pas bénéficié, une indemnité compensatrice de congé”, whether the break comes from the employer or the employee. Add the final paperwork trio that every employer must deliver at the end of the contract: the work certificate (certificat de travail), the final settlement receipt (solde de tout compte), and the France Travail certificate (attestation France Travail, the document that lets the employee register for unemployment benefits with the public employment service). Late or missing documents generate daily penalties and separate damages, and the URSSAF (union de recouvrement des cotisations de sécurité sociale et d’allocations familiales, the agency that collects employer and employee social contributions) reconciles the final payroll return (déclaration sociale nominative) with the sums paid, so under-declared severance or notice resurfaces as a reassessment with surcharges.
Budget the employer’s social and tax treatment realistically. Statutory severance within the legal limit is largely exempt from social contributions and income tax up to statutory ceilings, while supra-legal top-ups (transactional supplements, contractual enhancements) are treated less favourably. Notice compensation is salary and bears full contributions. Paid-leave compensation is salary too. From abroad, instruct the French payroll provider before the dismissal meeting, not after: confirm the applicable convention collective, the reference salary, the accrued leave balance, the notice length, and the settlement amounts in writing. Ask for a written costing with gross, net, employer contributions, and filing lines, because the employee’s counsel will recompute everything at the hearing. A clean final payslip with exact leave counts and contribution lines often prevents a dispute; an approximate one invites it.
B. Labour court review, the Macron scale and the safer agreed exit: what the judge checks and what a settlement buys you
The conseil de prud’hommes reviews dismissals in two passes: substance first, procedure second. On substance, the question is whether the stated facts are established, precise, objective and serious enough to justify ending the contract. A letter that says the employee lacked rigour, without dates, figures or examples, fails. A letter that lists three documented incidents with supporting attachments forces the judge to engage with the file. Remember the lesson of the 23 October 2024 ruling: the judge must examine every complaint stated in the letter, which cuts both ways, because a weak additional complaint dilutes a strong core one. Draft a short letter with two or three provable facts rather than a long catalogue of grievances. Where the motivation turns out thin, the Code allows the employer to clarify the stated reasons after notification, on its own initiative or at the employee’s request, within set time limits, and the clarified letter then defines the dispute: “La lettre de licenciement, précisée le cas échéant par l’employeur, fixe les limites du litige en ce qui concerne les motifs de licenciement.” Use that clarification window quickly when the employee asks for details; silence followed by invention at the hearing is the worst sequence. Even a poorly reasoned letter does not automatically void the dismissal, since “l’irrégularité que constitue une insuffisance de motivation de la lettre de licenciement ne prive pas, à elle seule, le licenciement de cause réelle et sérieuse et ouvre droit à une indemnité qui ne peut excéder un mois de salaire.” The price of thin reasoning is capped at one month’s salary, but that supplement adds to any damages for an unfounded dismissal.
Where the dismissal has no real and serious cause, damages follow the Macron scale (barème Macron, the statutory table that sets minimum and maximum compensation according to seniority). The Code states that “Si le licenciement d’un salarié survient pour une cause qui n’est pas réelle et sérieuse, le juge peut proposer la réintégration du salarié dans l’entreprise, avec maintien de ses avantages acquis.” Reinstatement is almost always refused by one side, and the judge then awards compensation within the table: for example, with one full year of service the range runs from one to two months of gross salary, with two years from three to three and a half months, rising progressively with seniority toward twenty months at the top end. With less than one year of service and depending on company size, the minimum can be zero while the maximum is one month, which still leaves the employee’s legal costs and the employer’s management time. Procedural breaches (missed five-day invitation period, missing outside-adviser mention, early posting of the dismissal letter) add compensation of up to one month’s salary on top, even when the cause itself was real and serious. Null dismissals, involving harassment, discrimination or a protected employee dismissed without the required authorisation, escape the scale with a minimum of six months’ salary and no maximum. For a first hire with short seniority, the headline damages may look contained, but the employer’s true cost includes French counsel fees, management travel, translation of foreign-language exhibits, and the payroll corrections ordered by the judgment. Proceedings before the labour court typically run twelve to twenty-four months to judgment, plus conciliation and possible appeal, during which the file stays open and the company’s Kbis (the official company identity extract issued by the commercial court registry, the greffe) still shows an active employer with obligations.
The co-employer trap illustrates why the letter must name the right employer and every factual basis. On 22 October 2025, appeal number 24-17.333, the social chamber recalled the notification rule, “Selon ce texte, lorsque l’employeur décide de licencier un salarié, il lui notifie sa décision par lettre recommandée avec avis de réception. Cette lettre comporte l’énoncé du ou des motifs invoqués par l’employeur.” In that case, two companies were found to be joint employers of the same employee under a single contract, and the dismissal pronounced by only one of them, ending all of the employee’s duties, was treated as pronounced by both, with the court of appeal faulted for not checking whether the stated reasons could constitute a real and serious cause vis-à-vis the second company. Foreign groups that employ through a French subsidiary while the parent gives daily instructions should read this carefully: hollowing out the subsidiary’s authority while managing the employee from abroad can create joint-employer exposure, and the dismissal letter must then stand up against both entities.
Against this background, the negotiated agreed termination (rupture conventionnelle, the mutual separation procedure approved by the administration) often offers the cleanest exit for a first hire, where both sides genuinely prefer a quick documented parting to a fight. The Code opens that path plainly: “L’employeur et le salarié peuvent convenir en commun des conditions de la rupture du contrat de travail qui les lie. La rupture conventionnelle, exclusive du licenciement ou de la démission, ne peut être imposée par l’une ou l’autre des parties.” The procedure requires at least one meeting, a 15-calendar-day retraction period for each side, then approval (homologation) by the DREETS (direction régionale de l’économie, de l’emploi, du travail et des solidarités, the regional authority that validates agreed terminations), which has 15 working days to respond, with silence meaning approval. The agreed payment cannot fall below statutory severance, and in practice the employee expects a premium for giving up the right to challenge the dismissal, often one to three months of salary for short seniority, calibrated against the Macron-scale exposure the employer avoids. The employee keeps unemployment rights, which a resignation would not provide, and the employer buys legal closure, subject to consent that is fully voluntary: pressure, threats or deception void the agreement. Where consent is genuine, approval statistics are favourable and the file closes in about five to six weeks. Where the relationship has already turned hostile or the employee claims harassment or discrimination, do not force this route; a contested approval or a later nullity action costs more than a properly run dismissal. A post-dismissal settlement (transaction) remains possible after notification to cap the dispute, but it must be signed after the dismissal, contain mutual concessions, and comply with case-law conditions to be enforceable.
Conclusion
Firing your first French employee from abroad is not a phone call but a three-act file: a precise real and serious cause documented with dates and figures, a disciplined invitation, meeting and notification calendar with five working days then two working days, and a fully costed exit covering severance at one quarter of a month per year for the first ten years, notice, and unused leave. Disciplinary cases add the two-month knowledge clock and the two-day to one-month sanction window, and inflated misconduct labels backfire. The labour court checks every complaint in the letter, applies the Macron scale where the cause fails, adds up to one month for procedural faults, and removes the cap entirely for null dismissals. The agreed termination before the DREETS offers a faster approved parting where consent is real, at the price of a negotiated premium above the statutory floor. Foreign founders who mandate a local representative, send every letter by registered post with acknowledgment, keep the paper trail in France, and cost the payroll lines before the meeting turn an anxious transatlantic decision into a defensible file. Where the facts are thin, the timeline is blown, or a protection applies, pause and take advice before posting anything: the cheapest dismissal is the one that survives the judge.
Need a quick opinion on your case.
Telephone consultation in 48 hours with a lawyer of the firm: 80 EUR including VAT for the first consultation. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22 or write via the contact page with your contract, the invitation and dismissal letters, and your last three payslips. Answers in English for foreign founders and companies doing business in France.