Is a job title on a contract worth more than a diploma? The Court of Cassation settles this dispute with article 1103 of the Civil Code.
“If you want a good job and earn a good living, do well in school.” Many children have heard this phrase from their parents during their younger years and yet it is not an absolute truth. The story of this employee is proof. In 2002, she signed a permanent contract as an accountant even though she did not have the required diploma. However, the company, an association, is aware and the contract is signed with the consent of both parties. No litigation on the horizon.
“It had been decided that the employee would be an accountant even though she had neither the necessary diplomas nor experience. That does not pose a problem if that is indeed the intention of the parties,” comments Anthony Coursaget, labor law lawyer at the Paris Bar. The employee performs her tasks correctly but an event will change everything.
In December 2004, the employer made a change to the collective agreement. The UNAF convention which was in application is replaced by the national convention of March 15, 1966. By reclassifying workers, the company informs the employee of her new status: principal administrative agent. This classification grants it a coefficient of 405, where the accounting name would allow it to benefit from a coefficient of 556.
The employee therefore contests her new classification, demanding the classification of accountant (coefficient 556) or senior technician (coefficient 647). “The qualification of an employee results from the missions carried out. The reality of the functions, what is recorded on the pay slip are clues in the event of litigation,” adds Anthony Coursaget. Having become a union delegate, the employee took legal action almost a decade later.
The Industrial Tribunal was contacted for unequal treatment and union discrimination. The employee’s requests were rejected by the industrial tribunal and then by the Nîmes Court of Appeal in a decision of March 26, 2024. The judges justified this refusal by the absence of a diploma and by a lack of proof of the reality of the missions carried out. Argument already put forward by the employer.
The Court of Cassation was seized and delivered its verdict in a decision dated February 4, 2026. The High Court first ruled in favor of the company by rejecting the request for union discrimination. However, she recalls that under article 1103 of the Civil Code, the employment contract takes precedence over actual tasks. And the mention of accountant is clearly present on the employee’s contract, which should oblige the employer to provide her with the correct coefficient.
Thanks to this decision, the employee has already obtained payment of her legal costs but she could win even bigger in the future. The Court of Appeal will have to retry the case but it can claim back pay with related paid leave and damages. Postponed over years, this calculation could allow the employee to leave with thousands of euros.
