You hired your first employee in France from abroad, and the relationship is not working. The employee misses deadlines, disregards instructions, or behaves in a way that makes continued employment impossible. You live in London, New York, Dubai or Singapore, you run a French SAS (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 par actions simplifi\u00e9e, the flexible joint-stock company most foreign founders choose) or a SARL (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 responsabilit\u00e9 limit\u00e9e, the limited liability company with stricter internal rules), and you now need to dismiss that employee without creating a lawsuit that will cost ten times the severance you tried to save. French dismissal law does not forgive improvisation. A dismissal for personal grounds (licenciement pour motif personnel) follows a mandatory step-by-step procedure, strict waiting periods, and costly consequences when any step is skipped. The good news is that every step can be completed from abroad, provided you understand the sequence, keep written proof of each date, and calculate notice and severance correctly. This guide explains the procedure a foreign employer must follow, the deadlines that most often trap companies directed from abroad, what the dismissal will cost depending on the seriousness of the misconduct, and how to close the file and defend it before the French labour court (conseil de prud’hommes, the elected court that hears employment disputes).<\/p>\n
A dismissal for personal grounds covers every reason linked to the employee as a person: misconduct, poor performance, repeated absences that disrupt the business, or loss of trust. It is distinct from dismissal on economic grounds, which follows a far heavier procedure with redeployment duties and applies when the job itself disappears. The statute states the core requirement in one sentence: “Tout licenciement pour motif personnel est motiv\u00e9 dans les conditions d\u00e9finies par le pr\u00e9sent chapitre. Il est justifi\u00e9 par une cause r\u00e9elle et s\u00e9rieuse.”<\/a> A real and serious cause means facts that are established, sufficiently serious to make continued employment impossible or at least to justify the dismissal, and stated precisely in the dismissal letter. From abroad, founders often believe a short email ending the contract is enough. It is not. French law imposes a preliminary meeting, minimum waiting periods, and a formal notification letter, and each of these steps can be handled remotely through registered mail, a local representative, or a lawyer holding a written mandate.<\/p>\n The procedure starts before any decision is taken. The statute provides: “L’employeur qui envisage de licencier un salari\u00e9 le convoque, avant toute d\u00e9cision, \u00e0 un entretien pr\u00e9alable.”<\/a> The invitation to the preliminary meeting (convocation \u00e0 l’entretien pr\u00e9alable) is sent by registered letter (lettre recommand\u00e9e) or delivered by hand against a signed receipt, and it must state its purpose. For a founder living abroad, the registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt (lettre recommand\u00e9e avec avis de r\u00e9ception) is the safest channel because it creates dated proof of sending and delivery. If the employee refuses to collect the letter, keep the returned envelope unopened together with the tracking record: the courts examine the date of presentation, and your file must show that you sent the invitation correctly and on time.<\/p>\n At the meeting, the employer states the contemplated grounds and listens to the employee’s explanations, since “Au cours de l’entretien pr\u00e9alable, l’employeur indique les motifs de la d\u00e9cision envisag\u00e9e et recueille les explications du salari\u00e9.”<\/a> You do not have to attend in person from abroad. A person holding your written authority can conduct the meeting: a co-director, the French accountant with a clear mandate, or your lawyer. What matters is that the representative knows the file, states the facts precisely, takes notes, and collects the employee’s answers. The employee has the right to be assisted, as “le salari\u00e9 peut se faire assister par une personne de son choix appartenant au personnel de l’entreprise.”<\/a> In a very small company with no staff representatives, the invitation must mention that the employee may be assisted by an external employee adviser (conseiller du salari\u00e9) chosen from an official list, with the address of the offices where that list is available. Foreign founders regularly forget this sentence in companies with one or two employees, and that omission alone creates an irregularity.<\/p>\n After the meeting, a minimum waiting period applies before the dismissal can be notified. Then comes the dismissal letter itself, governed by a strict rule: “Lorsque l’employeur d\u00e9cide de licencier un salari\u00e9, il lui notifie sa d\u00e9cision par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec avis de r\u00e9ception.”<\/a> The same text adds that the letter states the ground or grounds relied upon and that “Elle ne peut \u00eatre exp\u00e9di\u00e9e moins de deux jours ouvrables apr\u00e8s la date pr\u00e9vue de l’entretien pr\u00e9alable au licenciement auquel le salari\u00e9 a \u00e9t\u00e9 convoqu\u00e9.”<\/a> In practice, this letter is the most important document of the whole file. The Cour de cassation (the supreme court for civil and criminal matters, which reviews labour cases through its social chamber) held on 23 October 2024, appeal no. 22-22.206, that “la lettre de licenciement fixe les limites du litige en ce qui concerne les griefs articul\u00e9s \u00e0 l’encontre du salari\u00e9”<\/a> and that “le juge a l’obligation d’examiner l’ensemble des griefs invoqu\u00e9s dans la lettre de licenciement.”<\/a> Concretely, the labour court judges only the facts written in that letter: facts you forgot to mention cannot be added later, and vague wording such as loss of trust without dated examples puts the dismissal at risk. A related provision allows the employer to clarify the stated grounds after notification, on his own initiative or at the employee’s request, since “La lettre de licenciement, pr\u00e9cis\u00e9e le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant par l’employeur, fixe les limites du litige en ce qui concerne les motifs de licenciement.”<\/a> But clarification cannot invent new grounds; it only explains what the letter already contains. Founders directing their company from abroad should therefore draft the letter with care, list each dated fact, keep the evidence behind each fact, and send it by registered mail with acknowledgment of receipt from France, keeping the postal receipts in the file. Guidance published by the public service confirms this sequence step by step for employers and employees alike (see the official procedure page on service-public.fr<\/a> and the Ministry of Labour notice on travail-emploi.gouv.fr<\/a>). Readers setting up their French presence often arrive at dismissal questions right after choosing their vehicle and hiring; the broader comparison of SAS, SARL, branch and subsidiary is explained in our guide to choosing between a SAS, a SARL, a branch and a subsidiary from abroad<\/a>, and the hiring steps that precede any dismissal are detailed in our guide to hiring your first employee in France while living abroad<\/a>.<\/p>\n Three time limits cause most of the disputes involving companies directed from abroad. The first is the five-working-day gap between the invitation and the meeting: “L’entretien pr\u00e9alable ne peut avoir lieu moins de cinq jours ouvrables apr\u00e8s la pr\u00e9sentation de la lettre recommand\u00e9e ou la remise en main propre de la lettre de convocation.”<\/a> Count five full working days from the date the post office presents the letter, not from the date you posted it in London or New York. Distance slows everything down, so post the invitation early and diary the earliest lawful meeting date. The second is the two-working-day gap between the meeting and the posting of the dismissal letter, quoted above. Sending the letter one day too early makes the procedure irregular; the dismissal itself can still stand if the cause is real and serious, but the employee obtains compensation for the irregularity.<\/p>\n The third limit is the most dangerous: the two-month prescription for disciplinary matters. Where the dismissal punishes misconduct (un licenciement disciplinaire), the facts must be acted upon quickly, because “Aucun fait fautif ne peut donner lieu \u00e0 lui seul \u00e0 l’engagement de poursuites disciplinaires au-del\u00e0 d’un d\u00e9lai de deux mois \u00e0 compter du jour o\u00f9 l’employeur en a eu connaissance, \u00e0 moins que ce fait ait donn\u00e9 lieu dans le m\u00eame d\u00e9lai \u00e0 l’exercice de poursuites p\u00e9nales.”<\/a> The Cour de cassation gave this rule real teeth on 23 June 2021, appeal no. 20-13.762, holding that “aucun fait fautif ne peut donner lieu \u00e0 lui seul \u00e0 l’engagement de poursuites disciplinaires au-del\u00e0 d’un d\u00e9lai de deux mois \u00e0 compter du jour o\u00f9 l’employeur en a eu connaissance.”<\/a> and, critically for foreign-run companies, that “L’employeur, au sens de ce texte, s’entend non seulement du titulaire du pouvoir disciplinaire mais \u00e9galement du sup\u00e9rieur hi\u00e9rarchique du salari\u00e9, m\u00eame non titulaire de ce pouvoir.”<\/a> In plain terms, the clock starts when the employee’s line manager learns of the misconduct, not when the founder abroad reads the email about it. If your Paris team leader knew about a serious incident in June and you start the procedure in September, the facts are time-barred and the dismissal collapses. Distance is no excuse: organise internal reporting so that any incident is escalated to the decision-maker within days, and start the invitation letter as soon as the facts are known and verified.<\/p>\n A related trap concerns repeated misconduct. A sanction is defined broadly, since a sanction covers any measure other than verbal observations taken following conduct the employer regards as wrongful<\/a>, and a disciplinary summons follows its own formalities. An employer who already punished facts with a warning cannot reuse the same facts to dismiss later, unless new misconduct occurs. From abroad, founders sometimes send angry written warnings by email without realising they are exhausting their disciplinary rights; each written reproach should therefore be weighed before it is sent. Finally, remember that poor performance (insuffisance professionnelle) is not misconduct and escapes the two-month rule, but it demands a different file: dated objectives, warnings, support measures, and proof that the failure persists despite help. Mixed files that confuse performance with misconduct are a classic reason labour courts set dismissals aside.<\/p>\n Cost and proof decide whether a dismissal directed from abroad ends quietly or becomes a two-year dispute. French law prices each outcome: notice period (pr\u00e9avis), statutory severance (indemnit\u00e9 l\u00e9gale de licenciement), paid-holiday balance, and, when the dismissal is challenged, the Macron scale (bar\u00e8me Macron) that caps and floors damages for dismissal without real and serious cause. Proof means the complete paper file the labour court will read: invitation, attendance sheet or meeting notes, dismissal letter with postal receipts, payslips, final settlement documents, and the evidence behind every stated fact. A founder abroad who keeps this file in order spends a fraction of what a missing document costs at trial.<\/p>\n The distinction between an ordinary dismissal and a dismissal for serious misconduct (faute grave) changes the bill entirely. Serious misconduct means a fault that makes it impossible to keep the employee even during the notice period: theft, violence, deliberate sabotage, or prolonged unauthorised absence. Ordinary misconduct (faute simple) or poor performance keeps the employee entitled to notice and severance. The notice periods depend on seniority: the statute grants, for employees with less than six months of service, the period set by statute, collective agreement or local usage; for six months to under two years of service, one month; and the text continues with two months for two years or more, as detailed in the notice-period article of the Labour Code<\/a>. Many sector agreements grant longer notice, so check the applicable convention collective (the industry-wide collective bargaining agreement that sets minimum employment terms) before calculating. During notice, salary and benefits continue; if the employer releases the employee from working the notice, the salary for the full notice period remains due.<\/p>\n Severance follows a parallel logic. The law provides: “Le salari\u00e9 titulaire d’un contrat de travail \u00e0 dur\u00e9e ind\u00e9termin\u00e9e, licenci\u00e9 alors qu’il compte 8 mois d’anciennet\u00e9 ininterrompus au service du m\u00eame employeur, a droit, sauf en cas de faute grave, \u00e0 une indemnit\u00e9 de licenciement.”<\/a> CDI means contrat \u00e0 dur\u00e9e ind\u00e9termin\u00e9e, the permanent employment contract without an end date. The statutory minimum equals “Un quart de mois de salaire par ann\u00e9e d’anciennet\u00e9 pour les ann\u00e9es jusqu’\u00e0 dix ans”<\/a> and “Un tiers de mois de salaire par ann\u00e9e d’anciennet\u00e9 pour les ann\u00e9es \u00e0 partir de dix ans.”<\/a> Take a concrete example: an employee with three years of service and a gross monthly reference salary of 3,000 euros receives at least 2,250 euros (3 \u00d7 0.25 \u00d7 3,000). Collective agreements frequently grant more generous severance, and the higher amount always applies. Add the balance of unused paid holidays (indemnit\u00e9 compensatrice de cong\u00e9s pay\u00e9s), which is due in every case including serious misconduct.<\/p>\n Labelling a dismissal as serious misconduct to save notice and severance is a gamble the courts punish. The statute states: “Lorsque le salari\u00e9 n’ex\u00e9cute pas le pr\u00e9avis, il a droit, sauf s’il a commis une faute grave, \u00e0 une indemnit\u00e9 compensatrice.”<\/a> On 4 June 2025, appeal no. 24-10.591, the Cour de cassation applied this strictly, recalling that “Selon ce texte, lorsque le salari\u00e9 n’ex\u00e9cute pas le pr\u00e9avis, il a droit, sauf s’il a commis une faute grave, \u00e0 une indemnit\u00e9 compensatrice.”<\/a> and holding that an employer who wrongly deprives the employee of the notice period owes the full compensatory payment, because the failure to work the notice results from the employer’s decision rather than from any fault. In that case the dismissal, pronounced for serious misconduct, was judged without real and serious cause, and the employer had to pay the notice the employee had been denied. Before writing faute grave on the letter, verify that the facts truly prevent any continued presence, keep the evidence proving that gravity, and consider whether an ordinary dismissal with notice and severance costs less than a lost trial with back pay, damages, and reimbursement of unemployment benefits to France Travail (the public employment service, formerly P\u00f4le emploi, which pays jobseekers’ allowances).<\/p>\n Ending the contract correctly from abroad means producing four documents and four filings. At the end of the contract the employer issues the final payslip with all balances, the work certificate (certificat de travail), the final settlement receipt (solde de tout compte), and the employer attestation for France Travail that lets the employee claim unemployment benefits. The certificate is mandatory, since “A l’expiration du contrat de travail, l’employeur d\u00e9livre au salari\u00e9 un certificat dont le contenu est d\u00e9termin\u00e9 par voie r\u00e9glementaire.”<\/a> The final settlement lists every sum paid at departure, and the statute warns that “Le re\u00e7u pour solde de tout compte peut \u00eatre d\u00e9nonc\u00e9 dans les six mois qui suivent sa signature, d\u00e9lai au-del\u00e0 duquel il devient lib\u00e9ratoire pour l’employeur pour les sommes qui y sont mentionn\u00e9es.”<\/a> Send these documents by registered mail or tracked delivery, keep the proofs of dispatch, and file the final social declarations: the last DSN (d\u00e9claration sociale nominative, the monthly electronic payroll return sent to URSSAF, the body collecting social contributions, and the tax administration) reporting the end of the contract, and the France Travail attestation transmitted electronically. Late or missing attestations routinely generate penalty claims before the labour court, so diary them as part of the dismissal timetable rather than as an afterthought.<\/p>\n If the employee challenges the dismissal, the case goes to the conseil de prud’hommes of the place of work. For an employee working in Paris, that is the Paris labour court; for the inner suburbs, the court of the department where the work is performed. Proceedings start with a conciliation hearing, and many cases settle there when the file is clean. If the court finds the dismissal without real and serious cause, damages follow the statutory scale: the judge may propose reinstatement, and if either side refuses, the judge awards compensation between set floors and ceilings based on seniority, as explained in the compensation-scale article of the Labour Code<\/a>. For example, an employee with two full years of service faces a floor of three months’ gross salary and a ceiling that rises with seniority; bargaining in conciliation therefore happens in the shadow of that table. Procedural errors alone, even when the cause is real and serious, can add up to one month’s salary. Time works in the employer’s favour once the file is closed properly, because “Toute action portant sur la rupture du contrat de travail se prescrit par douze mois \u00e0 compter de la notification de la rupture.”<\/a> After twelve months from notification without a claim, the dismissal can no longer be challenged on its termination. Keep the complete file for at least that period, and longer in practice: postal receipts, meeting notes, the evidence for each stated fact, payroll records, and the final-statement proofs. A founder in another time zone wins these cases the same way a Paris-based employer does, with dated paper, exact statutory delays, and a letter that states every fact the company intends to defend.<\/p>\n Dismissing a first French employee from abroad succeeds when the founder respects the order of operations: invite to the preliminary meeting by registered letter, wait five working days, hold a real meeting through a mandated representative, wait two working days, then notify precise dated grounds by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt. Disciplinary facts expire two months after the line manager learns of them, so internal reporting must be immediate. Ordinary dismissal carries notice and severance calculated on seniority and reference salary; serious misconduct removes both but requires proof of gravity, and an error on that label costs the full notice plus damages under the statutory scale. Close the file with the final payslip, work certificate, final settlement receipt and France Travail attestation, file the last DSN, and archive every receipt for at least twelve months. Handled this way, a painful decision stays a controlled cost instead of becoming a labour court defeat.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" How a foreign founder dismisses a French employee for personal grounds from abroad: preliminary meeting, two-month rule, notice, severance and labour court proof.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16490,"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-2141737","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-decryptage","category-doing-business-in-france"],"yoast_head":"\nA. What procedure must a foreign employer follow: invitation, preliminary meeting and dismissal letter?<\/h3>\n
B. What deadlines trap foreign employers: the two-month disciplinary rule and the minimum waiting periods?<\/h3>\n
II. What does a dismissal cost and how do you prove it before the French labour court?<\/h2>\n
A. How much notice and severance pay do you owe: ordinary dismissal versus serious misconduct?<\/h3>\n
B. How do you close the file from abroad: final pay, certificates, France Travail attestation and the labour court scale?<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n