While amicable dispute resolution methods are flourishing in many countries, mediation remains marginal in French employment law: an analysis.
Yet its advantages are many: easing tensions, restoring dialogue and avoiding long and costly court proceedings. Why is this practice struggling to take hold?
Faced with the rise in conflicts within companies, mediation appears to be a modern response to relationship difficulties between employers and employees. Based on the intervention of a neutral and independent third party, it allows the parties to build a solution themselves, in a confidential setting, without a decision being imposed on them. Unlike a trial, mediation does not seek to designate a winner and a loser. Its aim is to restore communication, understand each party’s interests and foster a lasting agreement. This philosophy explains its development in many fields, whether family law, consumer law or business law.
A legal framework that is now well established
In France, mediation now benefits from a solid legal framework. The Act of 8 February 1995, the Code of Civil Procedure and several provisions of the Labour Code govern its use in individual and collective disputes (read this article). The employment tribunal judge may propose mediation or invite the parties to meet a mediator, particularly where reaching an agreement seems possible. The decree of 18 July 2025, which came into force on 1 September of that year, confirms this desire to strengthen amicable dispute resolution. It marks an important step in the modernisation of French justice, even though certain employment tribunal proceedings remain excluded from this reform.
A practice still too rarely used
Despite this legal arsenal, mediation remains largely underused before employment tribunals. In practice, the conciliation procedure, although compulsory in many disputes, is often reduced to a formality before the case is referred to the judgment panel. In-depth discussions that could restore the relationship between the parties remain rare. This situation is explained in particular by a judicial culture that is still strongly geared towards litigation. Employment tribunal members have little time to guide the parties through a genuine mediation process, while litigants themselves are still largely unaware of this option.
An alternative that complements conciliation
While employment tribunal conciliation has the advantage of being free, quick and part of the court proceedings, it does not always make it possible to address the human dimensions of the conflict. Mediation, on the other hand, offers a space for listening, where emotions, misunderstandings and needs can be expressed. It is particularly relevant in situations of psychological harassment, distress at work or a lasting deterioration in working relationships. The parties remain in control of the solution adopted, which encourages better acceptance of the agreements reached. This method does, however, have certain limits. It requires both parties to be willing to take part in the process, may involve a financial cost and is not suitable where the balance of power is too uneven or where one of the parties is acting in bad faith.
Examples from abroad show another way
Yet the experience of several countries shows that a proactive policy can profoundly change practices. In Italy, mediation has become compulsory in several areas before any case can be brought before a court. In Quebec, it is an integral part of the judicial culture and enjoys significant institutional support. These foreign models show that better training of legal professionals, combined with raising awareness among companies and employees, fosters the development of a genuine culture of amicable dispute resolution.
Changing practices
Beyond the legislation, then, what now seems necessary is a change of culture. Mediation is not second-rate justice but a different kind of justice, focused more on dialogue than on confrontation. At a time when psychosocial risks, organisational tensions and work-related litigation are on the rise, it could become a major lever for bringing peace to working relationships.
This still requires judges, lawyers, employment tribunal members, employers and employees to embrace it fully. More than a mere alternative to going to court, mediation now appears to be an essential complement to a faster, more humane and more lasting system of employment justice.