the Paris Judicial Tribunal says yes!

For the Judicial Court of Paris, employees working at work must receive meal vouchers when employees on site receive them (TJ Paris, March 30, 2021: RG: 20/09805).

Three weeks earlier, the Judicial Court of Nanterre …

–

For the Judicial Court of Paris, employees working at work must receive meal vouchers when employees on site receive them (TJ Paris, March 30, 2021: RG: 20/09805).

Three weeks earlier, the Nanterre Judicial Court ruled that employees working at home are not necessarily in a situation comparable to that of employees on site.

They are therefore not necessarily entitled to meal vouchers (TJ Nanterre March 10, 2021: n20 / 09616).

The Paris Judicial Court is not of the same opinion.

In this case, a company had placed most of its employees in work as of March 2020.

Employees were informed that those working on site in the company’s premises would continue to receive meal vouchers only to employees, unlike working employees who could no longer benefit from them.

The CSE, contesting this decision seized the Judicial Court of Paris.

For the TJ, since the worker has the same rightsthat the employee who performs his work on the premises of the company (c. trav.art. L. 1222-9), it is logical to apply this principle to the granting ofmeal vouchers.

To apply thisgeneral principle of equal treatmentbetween wages, so that salaried workers are subject toequivalent working conditionsto employees on site.

Different situations will be dealt with differently. However, it is essential that the difference in treatment be justified by objective, materially verifiable reasons related to the purpose of the rule establishing it.

The TJ takes the opportunity to make a few reminders about restaurant tickets:

– the definition of working does not imply that the employee must be domiciled, nor that he must have a personal space to prepare his meal (see c. work art. L. 1222-9);

-the object of the meal voucher is to allow the employee to eat when he completes his daily work schedule including a meal, but this is not conditioned by the fact that he must have a personal space for prepare this meal (see c. trav.art. L. 3262-1).

The allocation of restaurant tickets is not legally obligatory.

But once the employer has decided to allocate these to his employees, he cannot freely decide among his employees who may or may not benefit from a meal voucher.

Finally, the TJ recalls that the conditions of use of meal vouchers are compatible with the performance of duties at work since their principle is to allow the employee to eat when his working time includes a meal.

However, this title, workers are in a situation equivalent to that of employees on site.

In conclusion, for the TJ of Paris,if on-site employees benefit from meal vouchers, home employees must also be allocated them.

These two opposing decisions should lead employers with the utmost caution, pending the emergence of dominant case law, in one direction or another.

Sources:

Paris Judicial Court, social chamber, judgment of March 30, 2021: n20 / 09805

Judicial Court of Nanterre, social chamber, judgment of March 10, 2021: n20 / 09616 (UNSA FESSAD / Association of means of insurance of persons)

By Maitre Virginie LANGLET

Lawyer at the Paris staff

–