OD FLASH | Extension of collective agreements: the mention of the former name of an employers’ organization in an amendment does not call into question its capacity to enter into contracts or its representativeness

Council of State, June 30, 2025, No. 491546

A trade union brought an action before the Council of State for abuse of power against the order of the Minister of Labor, Employment, and Integration dated December 8, 2023, extending two amendments to agreements concluded under the national collective agreement for the plastics industry (No. 292). The union sought, in particular, the annulment of the extended amendments on the grounds that (i) they had been signed by an employers’ organization which it considered to be lacking legal personality due to its dissolution and (ii) that organization was not representative at the time the amendments were concluded.

The Council of State points out that the extension of collective agreements is governed by Articles L.2261-15 and L.2261-25 of the Labor Code. These provisions stipulate, in particular, that the extension shall be effected by order of the Minister responsible for labor, after a reasoned opinion has been issued by the National Commission for Collective Bargaining, Employment, and Vocational Training. However, the Minister of Labor may, after receiving a reasoned opinion from the aforementioned Commission, exclude from the extension any clauses that would be contrary to legal provisions. He may also refuse such extension on grounds of public interest, in particular on the grounds of excessive interference with free competition or in view of the objectives of employment policy.

On the basis of these provisions, the Council of State draws two conclusions.

On the one hand, the mention of a previous name of the signatory employers’ organization, which is a simple clerical error in this case, does not affect the latter’s capacity to enter into contracts. The Council of State states that such a circumstance has no bearing on the identity of the professional employers’ organization. Therefore, the federation had the capacity to enter into contracts, which derives from its legal personality regardless of its name. The Minister of Labor thus legally extended the two disputed amendments.

Furthermore, the mention of a previous name also has no effect on the representativeness of the employers’ organization. The professional employers’ organization was recognized as representative in the field of the national collective agreement for the plastics industry by an order of the Minister of Labor dated October 6, 2021, and the change of name has no impact on this representativeness.

There were therefore no grounds for the Minister of Labor to refuse to extend the two amendments. The union’s request was therefore rejected.