Hiring the first employee is the moment when a foreign founder’s French company becomes an employer in the practical sense. The occupational-health question is easy to postpone because the founder is abroad, the team is small, the employee works remotely, or the company has not yet generated revenue. None of those facts answers the legal question. The relevant dates are the employee’s effective start date, the nature of the post and the steps taken by the company before and after hiring.<\/p>\n
For an ordinary office or remote post, the employee must normally receive a visite d’information et de pr\u00e9vention<\/em> (VIP), meaning an information and prevention visit, within three months of actually taking the job. The employer must also arrange membership of a service de pr\u00e9vention et de sant\u00e9 au travail<\/em> (SPST), meaning an occupational prevention and health service, and request the appropriate follow-up. A post involving particular risks follows a different rule: a medical aptitude examination may have to take place before the employee is hired or assigned.<\/p>\n This article answers the practical question for a foreign founder setting up or operating a French company: what must be arranged, when does the clock start, what evidence should be kept, and when is the ordinary three-month period unavailable? It concerns the French employee’s occupational-health follow-up. The founder’s own immigration, tax residence or social-security status is a separate analysis.<\/p>\n The starting point is the identity of the employer, not the nationality of the shareholder or director. A French SAS, SARL, branch or subsidiary hiring a worker in France is subject to the French Labour Code’s health and safety framework. Article L. 4621-1 of that Code states: \u201cLes dispositions du pr\u00e9sent livre sont applicables aux employeurs de droit priv\u00e9 ainsi qu’aux travailleurs.\u201d In English, the book governing occupational prevention applies to private-law employers and workers. The rule therefore covers a French company controlled from London, New York, Dubai, Singapore or any other jurisdiction in exactly the same way as a company controlled by a French resident.<\/p>\n The general employer duty is set out in Article L. 4121-1 of the French Labour Code<\/a>. The employer must take measures necessary to protect workers’ physical and mental health and safety. Those measures include prevention, information, training, and an organisation and resources adapted to the circumstances. The first occupational-health appointment is not a substitute for risk prevention, induction, safe equipment or clear instructions. It is one part of a wider system that must exist from the first day of work.<\/p>\n The company must organise or join an SPST under Article L. 4622-1<\/a>. SPST means service de pr\u00e9vention et de sant\u00e9 au travail<\/em>. A small employer will generally use an inter-company service, commonly called an SPSTI, rather than employ its own occupational physician. The service is not the same thing as the employee’s private doctor, the French health-insurance fund, a payroll provider, or a private medical-insurance policy. Its role is linked to work, working conditions, exposure and prevention.<\/p>\n The service’s statutory mission is broader than arranging appointments. Under the current version of Article L. 4622-2<\/a>, its main purpose is to avoid deterioration of workers’ health caused by work. It carries out physical and mental health actions, assists with risk assessment and prevention, advises employers and workers, and monitors health according to occupational risks. The text expressly includes the impact of remote working on health and work organisation. That matters for a foreign founder who has a French employee working from a home office, a co-working space or several locations.<\/p>\n The service does not become optional because there is only one employee. The size of the company may affect which service is appropriate and how the service is organised, but it does not remove the employee’s individual follow-up. If the founder has one French employee and remains abroad, the company should still identify the establishment or workplace, contact the competent inter-company service, obtain its membership terms, and create a process for appointments and records.<\/p>\n The cost belongs to the employer. Article L. 4622-6<\/a> provides: \u201cLes d\u00e9penses aff\u00e9rentes aux services de pr\u00e9vention et de sant\u00e9 au travail sont \u00e0 la charge des employeurs.\u201d An employee should not be asked to pay the membership contribution or to absorb the cost of attending a required visit. Service Public also explains that the time spent at occupational-health appointments and the travel costs are borne by the employer and do not reduce the employee’s paid working time.<\/p>\n A foreign founder should separate three questions that are often mixed together:<\/p>\n This distinction is particularly important in a group structure. A foreign parent may recruit, pay or supervise the person informally, while the French subsidiary appears on the employment contract. The payroll, social-security and occupational-health documents should identify the actual employer and the establishment where the work is performed. A group chart is not enough to prove that the correct French entity complied.<\/p>\n For a normal software, consulting, design, sales or administrative position, the post will often fall within ordinary individual health monitoring. That is not a conclusion that can be made from the job title alone. A \u201cfounder assistant\u201d, \u201coperations manager\u201d or \u201ctechnical employee\u201d may visit a warehouse, use laboratory products, drive, work at height or handle equipment. The job description and the actual duties must be compared with the risk assessment before the company chooses the ordinary route.<\/p>\n The key hiring formalit\u00e9 is the d\u00e9claration pr\u00e9alable \u00e0 l’embauche<\/em> (DPAE), meaning the prior hiring declaration. Article L. 1221-10 of the Labour Code provides that hiring may occur only after the employer has made the nominative declaration to the designated social-protection bodies. The provision also requires the employer to make the declaration for each place where employees work. The official text is available in Article L. 1221-10<\/a>.<\/p>\n The DPAE is more than an administrative notification. Under Article R. 1221-2<\/a>, it carries several declarations and requests. Among them are the employer’s registration where necessary, the employee’s registration with the primary health-insurance fund, unemployment affiliation, the request to join an occupational-health service, and the request for either the VIP or the medical aptitude examination, depending on the post. The French text expressly lists \u201cLa demande d’adh\u00e9sion \u00e0 un service de sant\u00e9 au travail\u201d and \u201cLa demande de visite d’information et de pr\u00e9vention\u201d or \u201cla demande d’examen m\u00e9dical d’aptitude \u00e0 l’embauche\u201d.<\/p>\n This mechanism is useful for a foreign founder because it places the occupational-health request inside the ordinary hiring workflow. It is not, however, a certificate that the visit took place. The company should keep the DPAE receipt, the information sent to the service, the service’s membership confirmation, the appointment notice, any postponement, and the final attestation. A DPAE that was correctly filed but never followed by an appointment may show an initial request while leaving the employer unable to prove completion.<\/p>\n The territorial link should also be checked. Article R. 1221-3<\/a> provides for transmission of the DPAE to the collection body and the occupational-health service within the territorial scope of the establishment. In practice, the French company should tell the payroll provider where the worker actually works, whether there is a fixed establishment, and whether the worker is attached to a particular French site. A Paris address does not automatically answer the question if the worker spends most of the week in another region.<\/p>\n Since 28 December 2025, Article R. 1221-5<\/a> provides that the DPAE is made electronically. If the electronic route cannot be used, the employer must use the prescribed paper form and send it to the relevant body by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt no later than the last working day before the hire. The text also says that the unavailability of one transmission method does not excuse the employer from using the other. A foreign founder should therefore avoid treating an overseas payroll platform’s technical problem as a reason to start work without a DPAE.<\/p>\n A workable first-hire file should contain, at a minimum, the following information before the employee starts:<\/p>\n The founder may delegate this work to an accountant, an employer-of-record provider or a French payroll firm. Delegation changes who clicks the online form; it does not necessarily change the company’s legal responsibility as employer. The engagement letter should state who selects the SPST, who supplies the job-risk information, who books the appointment, who monitors the deadline, and who reports a failed or delayed appointment. The company should not assume that \u201cmedical follow-up included\u201d in a payroll package proves that the legal request was made for this specific worker.<\/p>\n Remote work creates an additional practical issue. The employee may live in France but work from several locations, or may perform duties for the French company while temporarily abroad. A French employment contract alone does not make every foreign medical examination equivalent to the French occupational-health procedure. The company should disclose the actual work pattern to the SPST and obtain its position on the appropriate service, appointment format and risk assessment. Article L. 4624-1 permits the statutory health follow-up to be organised by a health professional and provides for an individual attestation; any remote health practice must still respect consent, confidentiality and the conditions applicable to the service.<\/p>\n The evidence should be organised by dates rather than scattered across email accounts. A simple chronology can show: decision to hire, risk description, SPST contact, DPAE submission, request for VIP or aptitude exam, proposed appointment, employee attendance, certificate received, and any follow-up recommendation. That chronology is particularly valuable when the director lives outside France and several people handle the first hire from different countries.<\/p>\n For a worker who is not assigned to a particular-risk post and who is not subject to a special timing rule, the answer is generally yes. Article L. 4624-1 says that every worker receives individual health monitoring and that this monitoring includes a VIP after hiring, carried out by one of the permitted occupational-health professionals. The official wording is: \u201cCe suivi comprend une visite d’information et de pr\u00e9vention effectu\u00e9e apr\u00e8s l’embauche\u201d. The provision is linked to the current statutory framework at Article L. 4624-1<\/a>.<\/p>\n The regulatory deadline is in Article R. 4624-10<\/a>: \u201cTout travailleur b\u00e9n\u00e9ficie d’une visite d’information et de pr\u00e9vention … dans un d\u00e9lai qui n’exc\u00e8de pas trois mois \u00e0 compter de la prise effective du poste de travail.\u201d The legal clock begins when the employee actually takes the job. It does not begin on the date the company was incorporated, the date of the Kbis, the date the contract was signed, the date the DPAE was submitted, or the date the foreign founder first approved the recruitment budget.<\/p>\n Kbis is the extrait Kbis<\/em>, the official extract identifying a business registered in the French commercial register. It proves corporate registration; it is not an occupational-health document. Likewise, the DPAE is the prior hiring declaration; it triggers the request but does not replace the appointment. A foreign founder who plans a start date should therefore work backwards from that date and contact the SPST before the employee begins, even though the VIP itself may lawfully occur after the start for an ordinary post.<\/p>\n The three-month rule is a maximum period, not a recommended waiting period. Early scheduling is safer where the employee’s work, health, travel or availability may make an appointment difficult. It is also prudent when the company is using a new service, because membership verification and appointment capacity can take time. If the service proposes a date near or beyond the deadline, the employer should request an explanation in writing, ask what alternative process is available, and preserve all correspondence. The company should not erase its own request and assume that the service’s delay will be invisible.<\/p>\n The VIP is an individual professional-health assessment, not simply a group induction webinar. Article R. 4624-11<\/a> says that it is individual and has the purpose of asking the employee about health, informing the employee about possible risks of the job, raising awareness of prevention, identifying whether an orientation to the occupational physician is needed, and explaining how health monitoring works. The text also gives the employee the possibility of requesting a visit with the occupational physician at any time.<\/p>\n After the VIP, the professional provides an attestation of follow-up to the worker and the employer under Article R. 4624-14<\/a>. The employer should retain that attestation in the restricted employment-health compliance file. The employer is not entitled to the employee’s diagnosis or confidential medical information. What the company needs for ordinary compliance is proof that the follow-up took place and any work-related recommendation or restriction formally addressed to it.<\/p>\n The ordinary VIP should not be confused with an aptitude examination. For most office employees, a certificate of follow-up is the expected outcome, not a general declaration that the employee is medically fit for every possible task. If the health professional identifies a need for a medical review or an adjustment, the company must respond to the recommendation and reassess the actual duties. A founder should not add warehouse, driving or laboratory tasks to the job after the appointment without informing the occupational-health service.<\/p>\n The follow-up continues after the first visit. Under Article R. 4624-16<\/a>, renewal of an ordinary VIP cannot be set at a period exceeding five years. The actual interval is fixed in the occupational-health protocol by the occupational physician with regard to working conditions, age, health and risks. \u201cFive years\u201d is therefore a ceiling, not an automatic entitlement to wait exactly five years. The certificate should be read and its renewal date entered in the company’s compliance calendar.<\/p>\n There is a narrow possibility of not organising a new VIP when the worker has already received one within the previous five years, or within three years for the category covered by Article R. 4624-17. The conditions in Article R. 4624-15<\/a> are cumulative: the new job must be identical with equivalent exposure risks, the health professional must hold the last attestation or aptitude notice, and no relevant adaptation measure or incapacity opinion must have been issued during the applicable period. A medical check carried out by a foreign private doctor, a health-insurance certificate or a document supplied by a previous overseas employer does not automatically satisfy these conditions. The French SPST should confirm the exemption before the employer relies on it.<\/p>\n Service Public’s official page on occupational health also identifies specific rules for apprentices and other situations. In particular, the ordinary three-month assumption should not be applied mechanically to an apprentice or to a worker whose status or duties invoke a special provision. The page on possible exemption from the hiring visit should be read with the actual employment category and the current Code provisions, rather than used as a checklist detached from the post. The relevant public explanations are available at Service Public’s private-sector occupational-health page<\/a> and Service Public’s exemption page<\/a>.<\/p>\n Why does the proof matter if the employee does not complain? The employer’s obligation to arrange the visit remains a legal obligation even though the consequences of a breach depend on the facts. The recent Cour de cassation, Social Chamber, 24 September 2025, no. 24-13.813<\/a>, considered a claim arising from missing hiring and periodic medical visits. The Court held that the employee had to establish a loss in the circumstances of that case and stated: \u201cil appartient \u00e0 celui-ci, en cas de non-respect par l’employeur des prescriptions nationales en la mati\u00e8re, de d\u00e9montrer l’existence d’un pr\u00e9judice\u201d. That decision is not permission to omit the visit. It is a warning against promising a fixed damages award or describing every breach as automatically compensable.<\/p>\n Earlier case law must also be read in its procedural and temporal context. In Cour de cassation, Social Chamber, 29 March 2017, no. 16-10.545<\/a>, the Court rejected a request for judicial termination where the absence of hiring and periodic visits, considered in the circumstances, did not by itself prevent continuation of the employment contract. The case concerned a long employment relationship and the former legal language of a safety obligation. It does not eliminate the employer’s current duties under Articles L. 4121-1, L. 4624-1 and R. 4624-10. For a first-time foreign employer, the practical lesson is straightforward: comply, document compliance, and avoid making a litigation prediction based on one isolated fact.<\/p>\n If an employee misses an appointment, the employer should distinguish an employee’s refusal from an employer’s failure to arrange the visit. Keep the appointment notice, the employee’s explanation, the rescheduling request and the service’s instructions. If a service cannot offer a timely date, keep the original request, reminders and any alternative proposed. A documented effort does not automatically cure a late visit, but it creates the factual record needed to explain what happened and what corrective action was taken.<\/p>\n The ordinary three-month period is unavailable where the employee is assigned to a post presenting particular risks. Article L. 4624-2<\/a> provides that a worker assigned to such a post receives reinforced individual health monitoring. That monitoring includes a medical aptitude examination which replaces the ordinary VIP. The examination is designed to assess compatibility between the worker’s health and the post and is carried out before hiring and renewed periodically.<\/p>\n The current list of particular-risk posts is in Article R. 4624-23<\/a>, in force since 10 April 2026. It identifies exposure to asbestos; lead; carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic agents; biological agents in groups 3 and 4; ionising radiation; hyperbaric risk; and the risk of falling from height during the assembly or dismantling of scaffolding. A post is also particular-risk where assignment depends on a specific aptitude examination under the Labour Code.<\/p>\n Article R. 4624-22 confirms that a worker assigned to a post presenting particular risks for the worker, colleagues or third parties in the immediate work environment receives reinforced individual health monitoring. The exact wording and the cross-reference to the risk list appear in Article R. 4624-22<\/a>. The relevant question is not whether the company describes itself as a \u201cstartup\u201d or \u201cprofessional-services business\u201d; it is whether the actual post exposes someone to a listed or otherwise identified risk.<\/p>\n Examples show why a founder should provide the SPST with a detailed description. A remote software engineer who works at a screen from a home office will normally need ordinary follow-up, subject to the actual conditions. A scientist handling group 3 biological agents, an employee working with lead or carcinogenic substances, a person entering an area with ionising radiation, or a worker assigned to hyperbaric operations requires a much more careful analysis. A construction business may need to consider the scaffold rule and any other aptitude examination linked to a specific task. The company should not select \u201cVIP within three months\u201d simply because this is the first employee.<\/p>\n The employer can also identify additional particular-risk posts in its own organisation, following the process set out by Article R. 4624-23. The current text refers to consultation with the relevant occupational physicians and, where it exists, the comit\u00e9 social et \u00e9conomique<\/em> (CSE), meaning the social and economic committee. It also connects the list to the employer’s risk assessment and requires the employer to explain in writing why a post is added. The first employee may not yet create a CSE, but the absence of a CSE does not make the risk analysis optional.<\/p>\n For a particular-risk post, the company must plan the medical aptitude exam before the employee is hired or assigned. Article R. 1221-2 expressly allows the DPAE process to carry the request for the aptitude examination, but the request and the examination are different events. The employer should obtain the SPST’s confirmation of the correct route, give the medical professional the complete job and exposure information, and ensure that the worker is not placed in the particular-risk duties before the legally required aptitude step has been completed. The contract, training period and practical assignment should all be reviewed together.<\/p>\n Changing the job after the first appointment can change the answer. An office employee sent to a production site, a sales employee asked to drive heavy vehicles, or a manager who begins supervising a hazardous operation may require a new risk review. The original VIP certificate cannot be treated as a universal authorisation for every future task. A prudent internal rule is to notify the SPST before a material change in exposure, work location or equipment, and to record the advice received.<\/p>\n The same caution<\/a> applies to apprentices, minors, night workers and workers covered by sector-specific rules. The ordinary VIP framework may contain different timing or professional requirements for those categories. Service Public’s official occupational-health guidance explains that apprentices and other categories can be subject to separate rules. The contract, collective agreement and post should therefore be checked before the employee begins. An English-language summary written for a general office worker cannot safely be reused for a laboratory apprentice or a night-shift operator.<\/p>\n The founder’s practical timeline should look like this:<\/p>\n A foreign director can operate this timeline from abroad if the responsibility is assigned clearly. One person should own the deadline; one secure location should hold the evidence; and the payroll provider should report exceptions immediately. The company should also retain French and English descriptions of the job where the founder, worker and service do not share a first language. Translation helps communication, but it does not alter the French legal deadline.<\/p>\n The occupational-health file should be kept separate from the founder’s corporate formation file, while still being linked in the company’s legal calendar. A Kbis, articles of association, bank-account evidence and VAT registration document cannot prove that the first employee received a VIP. Conversely, an SPST attestation cannot prove that the DPAE or employment contract was correct. The company needs both corporate and employment records.<\/p>\n For international groups, the most common operational error is to let the foreign parent control the employment process while the French subsidiary remains invisible in the evidence. The parent may approve the hire, choose the software, pay the invoice or provide human-resources policies. The French employer should still appear on the contract, DPAE, SPST membership, appointment request and prevention documents. If a worker is seconded, supplied by a foreign employer or working cross-border, the applicable rules may differ and a separate posting or social-security analysis is required.<\/p>\n For Paris and \u00cele-de-France employers, the local issue is usually not a different statutory deadline but the identification of the correct establishment and service. A company with a registered office in Paris and a worker regularly operating in another department should provide the actual work pattern to its SPST and payroll provider. Keep the service’s written answer when there are multiple sites, home-working arrangements or travel between France and another country. Local logistics can affect the appointment, but they do not turn the three-month maximum into an open-ended period.<\/p>\n The competitive review of French search results also highlights the practical gap a foreign founder needs filled. Service Public maps the general rules and exemptions, while a professional publisher’s page defines the VIP and its periodicity. Neither format, by itself, gives the international employer a complete DPAE-to-proof workflow, a distinction between the founder and the employee, a 2026 risk-post check, or a record-keeping timetable. That is why the actionable answer is not merely \u201cbook a medical visit\u201d; it is to classify the post, connect the request to the DPAE, book the right follow-up, and retain evidence that matches each legal step.<\/p>\n For a foreign founder hiring an ordinary first employee in France, the safe legal sequence is to identify the French employer and establishment, join an SPST, file the DPAE, request the VIP, and ensure that the visit takes place within three months of the employee’s effective start. The deadline runs from actual work, not from incorporation, the Kbis or the contract signature. The employer pays the occupational-health cost and should preserve the DPAE receipt, service correspondence, appointment record and attestation.<\/p>\n If the post presents particular risks, the ordinary VIP is not the correct answer. Reinforced individual monitoring and a medical aptitude examination may be required before hiring or assignment. Foreign medical documents do not automatically create an exemption, and a later change in duties can require a new assessment. The company should treat occupational health as a dated compliance workflow, not as an optional benefit delegated vaguely to an overseas payroll provider.<\/p>\n Founders looking for a broader roadmap can consult the firm’s French business-law resources for international founders<\/a>. The employment-health question should then be reviewed alongside the employment contract, payroll registration, work location, risk assessment and any cross-border arrangement.<\/p>\n Need a quick opinion on your case<\/strong><\/p>\n Arrange a telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the firm to review your first French hire and the occupational-health timetable.<\/p>\n We can identify the correct service, the required visit and the evidence to preserve. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22<\/a> or contact the firm<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A practical French-law timetable for foreign founders: SPST membership, DPAE, the three-month VIP deadline and the prior aptitude exam for particular-risk posts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16406,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80314,80313],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2116268","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-decryptage","category-doing-business-in-france"],"yoast_head":"\nI. What must a foreign founder arrange before and after the first French hire?<\/h2>\n
A. Why does a first employee trigger a French occupational-health service?<\/h3>\n
\n
B. How does the DPAE connect the employee to the correct service?<\/h3>\n
\n
II. When must the first employee attend the occupational-health visit?<\/h2>\n
A. Is the ordinary VIP due within three months of the effective start?<\/h3>\n
B. When does a particular-risk post require an earlier aptitude exam?<\/h3>\n
\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n