OD FLASH | Reinstating an employee whose behavior is “borderline harassment” is impossible.

Court of Cassation, Social Chamber, December 17, 2025, No. 24-13.455

An employee, dismissed for serious misconduct, brought a claim before the labor court for reinstatement, arguing that her dismissal was invalid.

The court of appeals hearing the case dismissed her claim, finding that:

– on the one hand, that prior to the termination of the employment contract, several employees had accused the employee in question of “destabilizing behavior, bordering on harassment, manifested by intimidation and psychological manipulation, and had expressed their reluctance and difficulty in working with her, feeling that they were in constant danger”;

– on the other hand, that after the termination of her contract, she had again exerted psychological pressure on one of her former co-workers to change his testimony.

The Court of Cassation confirmed this reasoning. It points out that an employer is required to grant the request for reinstatement of an employee whose dismissal is invalid, unless it can justify why reinstatement is impossible. In this case, reinstatement was impossible given the employee’s behavior toward her coworkers, which was “bordering on harassment.” The employer’s refusal was therefore justified.

The Court of Cassation thus extends its previous case law, since it had already considered that an employer’s refusal to reinstate a protected employee who had committed acts of psychological harassment was justified in view of its safety obligation (Cass. soc., December 1, 2021, No. 19-25.715). Similarly, when the impossibility of reinstatement resulted from a risk of sexual harassment (Cass. soc., January 8, 2025, No. 23-12.574).