France: National agreement reached on work-related stress

The French agreement states that tackling stress at work should lead (the European accord reads “can lead”) to greater efficiency and improved occupational health and safety, with resulting economic and social benefits for companies, workers and society as a whole. The EU-level text states that diversity of the workforce is an important consideration when tackling problems of work-related stress. The French agreement adds to this the considerations of the diversity of work situations and the responsibility of employers.

The agreement aims to:

• increase the awareness and understanding of employers, workers and their representatives of work-related stress;
• draw their attention to signs that could indicate problems of work-related stress, as early as possible; and
• provide employers and workers with a framework to identify, prevent, avoid and tackle problems of work-related stress, without attaching blame to individuals for stress.

Within this framework, the social partners want to contribute to the preservation of workers’ health by:

• putting in place effective prevention in relation to the problems generated by work-related stress factors;
• information and training for all those involved in companies;
• the promotion of good practice in tackling stress-related problems, notably in the areas of company-level dialogue and organisational methods; and
• taking into account the balance between work and family/private life.

These four points are not specifically mentioned in the European accord. The French agreement thus has a considerably broader scope.

The EU-level text says: “Stress is a state, which is accompanied by physical, psychological or social complaints or dysfunctions and which results from individuals feeling unable to bridge a gap with the requirements or expectations placed on them.” The French negotiators decided not to use this description, opting instead for: “A state of stress arises from an imbalance between the perceived demands of the environment and the perceived resources available to the individual to cope with those demands.” This derives from a definition used by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work.

The European accord goes on to say: “The individual is well adapted to cope with short-term exposure to pressure, which can be considered as positive, but has greater difficulty in coping with prolonged exposure to intensive pressure.” The French text adapts this to read: “The individual is capable of coping with short-term exposure to pressure but has great difficulties in coping with prolonged or repeated exposure to intensive pressure.” Trade unions failed in an attempt to remove “prolonged” from the text, but did succeed in having the reference to “positive” stress deleted.

The French text repeats the EU-level agreement’s statement that: “Moreover, different individuals can react differently to similar situations and the same individual can react differently to similar situations at different times of his/her life. Stress is not a disease but prolonged exposure to it may reduce effectiveness at work and may cause ill health.” The employers insisted, despite union pressure, that the “stress is not a disease” statement be retained, because they were anxious to avoid any possibility of stress being officially recognised as an occupational illness.

Again, the French agreement follows the European text in stating that: “Stress originating outside the working environment can lead to changes in behaviour and reduced effectiveness at work. All manifestations of stress at work cannot be considered as work-related stress. Work-related stress can be caused by different factors such as work content, work organisation, work environment, poor communication, etc.” Employers thus accepted the focus on organisational, rather than individual, stress factors, while unions accepted that stress manifested at work does not necessarily originate there.

The accord underlines that combating stress falls within the general obligation to protect workers’ health and safety. Under the EU “framework” health and safety Directive (89/391/EEC) and the French Labour Code, employers are required to take the measures necessary to ensure safety and protect workers’ physical and mental health. This obligation covers problems of work-related stress in so far as they entail a risk to health and safety. All workers have a general duty to comply with protective measures determined by the employer.

The agreement states that tackling the causes and consequences of work-related stress may be carried out within an overall process of risk assessment, through a separate stress policy and/or by specific measures targeted at identified stress factors. The measures involved must be implemented under the employer’s responsibility, with the participation and collaboration of workers and/or their representatives.

Measures to prevent, eliminate or reduce problems of work-related stress can be collective, individual or both, according to the agreement. They can be introduced in the form of specific measures targeted at identified stress factors or as part of an integrated policy encompassing both preventive and corrective measures.

In this context, the French social partners reaffirm the “pivotal role” of doctors/occupational physicians in the workplace in a “multidisciplinary environment”. Importantly, these doctors are covered by medical confidentiality, which allows workers to remain anonymous.

Where the required expertise inside a company is insufficient, it may call on external experts, in accordance with EU and national legislation, collective agreements and practices, although not at the expense of the statutory workplace health and safety committee.

The signatories will ask the government to “extend” the cross-industry agreement on stress, thereby making it legally binding on all employers and employees.

Trade unions had wanted to include in the cross-industry accord a requirement for agreements to be negotiated in individual sectors in order to apply its provisions. The employers successfully opposed this idea, arguing that sector-level negotiators are independent and cannot be obliged to reach agreements. The final text of the cross-industry agreement states that sector- and company-level agreements may deviate from its provisions, but only if this is more favourable for employees.

The CFDT union confederation says the French accord “enriches” the European agreement in terms of:

• improved prevention of stress, by laying down a detailed list of stress indicators and factors;
• a reinforced role for workers’ representatives in the implementation of anti-stress measures; and
• a “considerably improved” definition of stress, with a greater emphasis on the role of work organisation in causing stress, and less emphasis on individual factors.

The CGT described the agreement as “an improvement on the European text”, with advances in the area of prevention and a stronger emphasis on work organisation. The CFTC argues that the agreement clarifies the responsibility of employers to prevent stress. However, CFTC regrets that the agreement does not include an obligation on sectors to negotiate on stress, as this would enable the provisions to be adapted to specific situations and made more “intelligible and operational” for company-level union representatives. FO has said it will use the agreement to seek sectoral negotiations on stress, pointing out that some industries, such as metalworking, are already looking at the issue.

The Medef employers’ organisation described the agreement as a “good compromise” between a literal transcription of the European accord and an appreciable improvement on its contents. It provides companies with an “educational tool” in dealing with stress. Medef is pleased that, while the agreement refers to work organisation, it underlines that stress arises from the situation of individuals and that people react to it differently.

This article is based on material provided by Christophe Boulay, European Employment Review correspondent for France.