Your first French employee has been on sick leave for weeks, and the occupational doctor has just declared them unfit to return to their job. You live in London, New York, Dubai or Singapore, you have no human resources department in France, and the letter from the medical service reads like a verdict with no instructions attached. This moment is one of the most dangerous in French employment law for a small foreign-owned company: the contract is suspended, the clock for a mandatory redeployment search is already running, and every week of hesitation converts into salary owed, while the wrong letter converts into a void dismissal with months of compensation attached.
French law does not allow an employer to dismiss an employee simply because a doctor declared them unfit. It imposes a strict sequence: acknowledge the opinion, search seriously for another suitable position, consult where required, and only then dismiss on the precise ground of unfitness — or face the financial consequences of doing nothing. This guide explains, for a foreign founder or foreign parent company employing in France, what the unfitness opinion (avis d’inaptitude) issued by the occupational doctor (médecin du travail) means, how to challenge it, how to run a genuine redeployment search (recherche de reclassement) from abroad with a one-person company, how the one-month salary resumption trap works, and how to price the exit — including the double severance pay (indemnité spéciale de licenciement) that applies when the unfitness comes from a work accident or an occupational disease. French acronyms are explained as they appear: the DREETS is the regional labour administration, URSSAF collects social contributions, the DSN is the monthly online social declaration, France Travail is the public employment service that pays unemployment benefits, and the conseil de prud’hommes is the elected labour court that hears employment disputes.
I. Understand the unfitness opinion and launch the redeployment search from abroad
Unfitness in French law is a medical and legal status, not an employer’s assessment. Only the occupational doctor — the independent physician attached to the occupational health service (service de prévention et de santé au travail) that every French employer must join — can declare an employee unfit, after a specific examination and procedure. Your own view that the employee cannot do the job has no legal value until that opinion exists, and acting as if it did is treated as a dismissal without cause.
A. What the occupational doctor’s opinion means and how to challenge it within days
The opinion can only be issued after a structured process. The doctor must examine the workstation and discuss the situation with both sides: “Après avoir procédé ou fait procéder par un membre de l’équipe pluridisciplinaire à une étude de poste et après avoir échangé avec le salarié et l’employeur”. This requirement comes from Article L4624-4 of the Labour Code. Where no adjustment of the current position is possible and the state of health justifies a change of position, the doctor declares the worker unfit for their workstation. The opinion must be supported by written conclusions with guidance on redeployment: “L’avis d’inaptitude rendu par le médecin du travail est éclairé par des conclusions écrites, assorties d’indications relatives au reclassement du travailleur.” This second sentence comes from the same Article L4624-4 of the Labour Code. In practice, the written conclusions indicate what the employee can still do, what must be avoided, whether training for another task is envisageable, and sometimes whether any continued employment would seriously harm their health — a mention that changes everything, as explained below.
Read the opinion the day it arrives and classify the file. First, determine the origin: unfitness of non-occupational origin (illness or accident outside work) follows Article L1226-2 of the Labour Code, while unfitness after a work accident (accident du travail) or an occupational disease (maladie professionnelle) follows the stricter regime of Article L1226-10 of the Labour Code. The distinction drives the cost of the exit — standard severance in the first case, double severance in the second — so verify with the payroll provider and the health insurance fund (CPAM, the local health insurance body) whether the absence was recognised as work-related before assuming the cheaper track. Second, check whether the opinion states that keeping the employee in any job would seriously harm their health or that their condition rules out any redeployment. That express mention, written by the doctor, exempts the employer from the redeployment search and allows dismissal to proceed directly — but only when the wording is express, not when it is merely suggested between the lines.
Either side can challenge the opinion, and the challenge is fast. The statute provides: “Le salarié ou l’employeur peut saisir le conseil de prud’hommes selon la procédure accélérée au fond d’une contestation portant sur les avis, propositions, conclusions écrites ou indications émis par le médecin du travail reposant sur des éléments de nature médicale en application des articles L. 4624-2 , L. 4624-3 et L. 4624-4 .” This remedy is found in Article L4624-7 of the Labour Code. The court may order an independent medical assessment and rules on an accelerated timetable. A foreign employer who believes the opinion rests on a misunderstanding of the actual workstation — for example a remote-work position described as physical presence, or duties that no longer exist since a reorganisation — should have French counsel file the challenge immediately rather than letting a questionable opinion freeze the company for months. Note the asymmetry: while the challenge is pending, the redeployment and dismissal timetable continues to run, so contesting the opinion does not pause the one-month clock described below. Run both tracks in parallel: challenge what is medically wrong, and search for redeployment as if the opinion will stand.
From abroad, organise the medical correspondence through one mandated person in France — typically the company’s French lawyer or the payroll provider with a written mandate. Occupational health services write in French, set examination dates at short notice, and expect responses within days. Give your representative standing instructions: forward every letter the same day, confirm every appointment in writing, request the written conclusions systematically, and never ask the doctor for a particular outcome. Any pressure on the occupational doctor, even a clumsy email suggesting the desired result, can be exhibited in court and destroys the employer’s credibility for the whole file.
B. How to conduct a genuine redeployment search with a one-person company
Once unfitness is declared, dismissal is forbidden until the employer has searched loyally for another suitable position. For unfitness of non-occupational origin, the rule states: “Lorsque le salarié victime d’une maladie ou d’un accident non professionnel est déclaré inapte par le médecin du travail, en application de l’article L. 4624-4 , à reprendre l’emploi qu’il occupait précédemment, l’employeur lui propose un autre emploi approprié à ses capacités”. This duty comes from Article L1226-2 of the Labour Code. The mirror duty for work-related unfitness uses identical terms and is found in Article L1226-10 of the Labour Code, which states: “Lorsque le salarié victime d’un accident du travail ou d’une maladie professionnelle est déclaré inapte par le médecin du travail, en application de l’article L. 4624-4, à reprendre l’emploi qu’il occupait précédemment, l’employeur lui propose un autre emploi approprié à ses capacités”. The proposal must take into account the doctor’s written conclusions and indications on what the employee can still do, and, where a staff representative body exists, its opinion must be sought. With a single employee there is usually no such body, which simplifies the procedure but does not lighten the search itself.
The search perimeter is national and group-wide: positions within the company and, where applicable, within group companies located in France whose organisation, activities or operating site allow staff transfers between them. For a foreign group, this means French entities only — there is no duty to offer a position in London or Dubai — but every French entity counts, including a sister subsidiary the founder may have forgotten. Document the perimeter explicitly: list the French companies examined, the positions reviewed, and why each was unsuitable in light of the medical indications. The proposed position must be appropriate to the employee’s remaining capacities, as comparable as possible to the previous job, and may involve adjustments to duties, hours or workstation, including part-time where the doctor recommends it. A lower-category position may be offered, but a pay cut of this kind requires the employee’s agreement and should be presented with the exact duties, location, working time and compensation in writing.
With a one-employee company, the honest outcome is often that no suitable position exists — but that conclusion must be proved, not asserted. Judges annul dismissals where the employer simply wrote that reclassification was impossible in a company of one person. The file must show real steps: the written request to the occupational doctor for clarification where the conclusions were vague, the inventory of tasks the company actually performs, the examination of part-time or reorganised duties against the medical restrictions, the written consultation of any French sister company, and the dated written offers where even a partial match existed. Where the search genuinely yields nothing, the employer must inform the employee in writing of the reasons that prevent redeployment. For work-related unfitness, the statute is express: “Lorsque l’employeur est dans l’impossibilité de proposer un autre emploi au salarié, il lui fait connaître par écrit les motifs qui s’opposent au reclassement.” This comes from Article L1226-12 of the Labour Code. Send that letter by registered mail with acknowledgement of receipt, keep the slip, and attach the supporting exhibits. An oral explanation during a call from abroad has no probative value.
Two exemptions only. The search is excused where the doctor’s opinion expressly states that any continued employment would seriously harm the employee’s health or that their condition rules out any redeployment in a job, and where the employee abusively refuses a suitable written offer — a refusal that must be documented offer by offer. Outside these cases, dismissing without written search evidence is treated as a dismissal without real and serious cause, with the compensation scale or nullity regime described in the companion guide on dismissing a first French employee while living abroad. Founders choosing their structure should also remember that the vehicle determines who bears these duties: the comparison of subsidiary, branch and other vehicles in France explains who signs, who pays and who is liable when employment obligations crystallise.
II. Dismiss lawfully or resume pay: the one-month clock and the cost of each exit
Unfitness suspends the normal rhythm of the contract and replaces it with a binary alternative: within one month of the return-to-work examination, the employee is redeployed or dismissed — otherwise the employer resumes paying the full salary for work that is not performed. This mechanism punishes inertia more severely than any other French dismissal regime, and distance makes inertia the default outcome unless the calendar is managed deliberately.
A. How to dismiss for unfitness after a failed search, from invitation to notification
The one-month rule applies to both origins. For non-occupational unfitness: “Lorsque, à l’issue d’un délai d’un mois à compter de la date de l’examen médical de reprise du travail, le salarié déclaré inapte n’est pas reclassé dans l’entreprise ou s’il n’est pas licencié, l’employeur lui verse, dès l’expiration de ce délai, le salaire correspondant à l’emploi que celui-ci occupait avant la suspension de son contrat de travail.” This trap is set by Article L1226-4 of the Labour Code. The work-related mirror is identical and found in Article L1226-11 of the Labour Code, which provides: “Lorsque, à l’issue d’un délai d’un mois à compter de la date de l’examen médical de reprise du travail, le salarié déclaré inapte n’est pas reclassé dans l’entreprise ou s’il n’est pas licencié, l’employeur lui verse, dès l’expiration de ce délai, le salaire correspondant à l’emploi que celui-ci occupait avant la suspension de son contrat de travail.” Mark the starting date — the medical examination for return to work (visite de reprise), not the date you received the letter — and count one calendar month. If dismissal has not been notified by that date, instruct the payroll provider to resume salary and social charges immediately; a late resumption accrues back pay with interest and signals bad faith to the court.
Dismissal for unfitness follows the standard personal dismissal procedure, with the ground adapted: the letter must state the unfitness, reference the doctor’s opinion and its date, describe the redeployment search and its outcome or the applicable exemption, and enclose or list the written evidence. The invitation to the preliminary meeting, the five-working-day minimum period, the meeting itself and the two-working-day period before notification all apply exactly as in an ordinary dismissal. From abroad, this means the same discipline: registered letters with acknowledgement of receipt at each step, a mandated representative attending the meeting in France, written meeting notes, and a notification letter that tells the complete story. A letter that merely states the unfitness without describing the search invites the judge to conclude there was none. Conversely, a letter that walks through the opinion, the medical indications, each search step with dates, the written impossibility notice or the exemption wording, and the offers made with the employee’s replies, confines the dispute to points the employer can prove.
Notice is not worked in unfitness dismissals. The statute states: “En cas de licenciement, le préavis n’est pas exécuté et le contrat de travail est rompu à la date de notification du licenciement.” This rule comes from Article L1226-4 of the Labour Code. The contract ends on the notification date, subject to the specific compensations below. Do not ask the employee to work their notice, and do not keep them on the payroll informally afterwards: any work performed after notification restarts Brennus-era arguments about the real end date and the real amounts due.
Paris and Paris-region practice adds logistical points. The occupational health services of Paris and the inner suburbs handle large volumes and communicate almost exclusively in French through employer portals; register the French company on the service portal and designate the mandated representative as the designated recipient, otherwise examination invitations go to an unattended mailbox. Where the file goes to court, the competent forum is generally the conseil de prud’hommes of the place of employment — for Paris-based staff, the Paris labour court, whose accelerated procedure for challenging medical opinions moves faster than ordinary dismissal litigation. Bailiff service across Paris, Hauts-de-Seine, Seine-Saint-Denis and Val-de-Marne executes within days, which helps keep the one-month timetable when acknowledgement slips come back unsigned. Finally, sector agreements common in the Paris region — Syntec for tech and consulting, commerce, hospitality — frequently improve severance and procedure above the statutory floor, so every computation below must be run twice: once under statute, once under the applicable agreement, paying the higher figure.
B. How to price the exit: double severance for work-related origin, leave, documents and court risk
The price of the exit depends first on the origin of the unfitness. For non-occupational unfitness, the dismissed employee receives the standard package: severance where eligible, accrued paid leave, and the usual exit documents, with no notice compensation since notice is not performed. Statutory severance requires an open-ended contract and at least eight months of uninterrupted service, serious misconduct excepted. The floor is regulatory: “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.” This minimum comes from Article R1234-2 of the Labour Code, with eligibility set by Article L1234-9 of the Labour Code. With a first hire dismissed after fourteen months on 3,000 euros gross monthly average, the statutory severance is roughly 875 euros — modest, but only if the sector agreement does not grant more, which in Paris-region sectors it often does.
For work-related unfitness, the exit is far more expensive by design. Termination in the cases covered by the statute opens two rights: compensatory payment in lieu of notice and a special severance equal to twice the standard amount. The key sentence provides for “une indemnité spéciale de licenciement qui, sauf dispositions conventionnelles plus favorables, est égale au double de l’indemnité prévue par l’article L. 1234-9”. This doubling rule is found in Article L1226-14 of the Labour Code. On the same 3,000-euro example, the special severance is therefore around 1,750 euros at minimum, plus the notice compensation the employee would have received had notice been worked, plus accrued leave. These amounts are not owed where the employer proves that the employee’s refusal of a suitable redeployment offer was abusive — a narrow exception that requires written offers and a demonstrably pretextual refusal, not a mere disagreement over preferences. Misclassifying a work-related unfitness as non-occupational to pay the single rate is one of the costliest errors in the file: the balance, plus interest, plus the litigation it triggers, always exceeds the saving.
Deliver the exit documents through the payroll provider at notification: final pay slip with the exact computation, balance of all accounts (solde de tout compte), work certificate, and the France Travail attestation for unemployment benefits, with the corresponding DSN declarations and URSSAF payments from the French company account. Late or incorrect documents generate standalone claims — for example delayed benefits — even where the dismissal was justified. Keep proof of every payment with its slip, and reconcile accrued leave against actual attendance before computing the settlement, because leave balances are the most common source of post-notification disputes.
Litigation risk concentrates on three points. First, the reality of the search: the judge examines each step, each letter and each reply, and an empty or purely formal search leads to compensation under the standard scale for dismissal without real and serious cause. Second, the origin classification: an employee who obtains recognition of the work-related character after the dismissal reopens the doubling claim with interest. Third, discrimination: unfitness connected to a disability, a pregnancy-related condition or harassment suffered at work can escalate the case into nullity territory with a minimum of six months’ salary and no ceiling, which is why the protection check — disability accommodations proposed, harassment alerts handled, maternity status verified — must precede any notification. Time limits are short on all sides: employment termination claims expire twelve months after notification, and wage claims within the framework recalled by Article L1471-1 of the Labour Code, under which “Toute action portant sur l’exécution du contrat de travail se prescrit par deux ans à compter du jour où celui qui l’exerce a connu ou aurait dû connaître les faits lui permettant d’exercer son droit.” Preserve the opinion, the conclusions, the search exhibits, the meeting records and the notification proofs indefinitely: a complete bundle confines the debate to the ground, while a thin one invites the judge to doubt everything.
Conclusion
An unfitness opinion is not permission to dismiss; it is the starting order of a supervised sequence. Read the doctor’s conclusions the day they arrive, classify the origin, challenge quickly what is medically wrong while searching as if the opinion will stand, prove every step of the redeployment search in writing, notify within the month or resume salary without delay, and pay the single or double severance that matches the true origin with the sector agreement checked on top. Managed this way from abroad through a single mandated representative, an unfitness file closes on a predictable timetable with a computable cost. Managed by silence, it becomes salary without work, then a dismissal without proof, then a Paris court date with a scale attached. Founders who document early, count honestly and act within the month keep control of the cost and the calendar — and keep their French venture able to hire again.