Skip to main content

Beyond Reparation, the Prevention of Work-Related Suicides

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Psychosocial Risks in Labour and Social Security Law

Part of the book series: Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being ((AHSW))

  • 732 Accesses

Abstract

The moral of Jean de la Fontaine’s fable, The Farmer and His Sons, is that “work is wealth”. Everyone is aware of the value of work, a key component of personal development, as well as a structuring force for society. However, the workplace can also quickly become a place of suffering that can negatively impact workers’ health and well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    De La Fontaine J., Les fables, Livre V, fable 9 “Le laboureur et ses enfants”, 1668.

  2. 2.

    de Coster M., Pichault F., Traité de sociologie du travail, De Boeck Université, Coll. Ouvertures sociologiques, 2nd edition, 1988, p. 63.

  3. 3.

    No accurate figures are available for the rate of work-related suicides, due to lack of statistics. While a rigorous assessment of the number seems necessary to provide an accurate picture of the reality, (V. Nasse P., Légeron P., Rapport sur la détermination, la mesure et le suivi des risques psychosociaux, mars 2008; Debout M., “L’appel des 44 pour la création d’un observatoire des suicides en France”, Libération, 23 May 2011) above all, special attention must be paid to the act of suicide itself, even in isolated cases.

  4. 4.

    Dejours C., Begue F., Suicide et travail: que faire?, PUF, Coll. Souffrance et théorie, 2009, 130 p.

  5. 5.

    Ibid.

  6. 6.

    Bonnechère M., “Le corps laborieux: réflexion sur la place du corps humain dans le contrat de travail”, Dr. ouv., 1994, p. 173.

  7. 7.

    Carbonnier J., Droit civil, Paris, PUF, t. 1, 11th ed. 1977, n° 48.

  8. 8.

    Supiot A., Critique du droit du travail, PUF, Coll. Les voies du droit, 1994, p. 54.

  9. 9.

    Law n° 2002-73 of 17 January 2002, JO of 18 January 2002, p. 1008.

  10. 10.

    Article L. 4121-1 of the Labour Code.

  11. 11.

    Soc. 28 February 2002, n°00-11.793 and n°99-18.390.

  12. 12.

    Whereas, in the administrative courts, “cases of suicide recorded as work-related accidents and those classified as work-related illnesses were apparently more evenly distributed” (Joly B., La prise en compte du suicide au titre des risques professionnels: regards croisés sur la jurisprudence judiciaire et administrative, Dr. soc., mars 2010, p. 264), it appeared from the case law of the Court of Cassation that the civil courts mainly classified suicides as industrial accidents. Although it concerns the specific system for seamen, it may be relevant to cite a ruling of 11 June 1981 (Soc. 11 June 1981, n° 80-13.145), in which the court affirmed that: “the suicide of a first mate, following a nervous breakdown after a minor incident during a shipping manoeuvre, resulted from an illness originating from a work-related risk rather than an industrial accident, as stipulated in article 9 of the decree-law of 17 June 1938, when it appeared that, since he had boarded the ship, the victim had been assigned to a very difficult task, for which he was unprepared, and that the nervous breakdown he had suffered was due to the resulting state of fatigue”.

  13. 13.

    See Ginon A.-S., Guiomard F., “Le suicide peut-il constituer un risque professionnel?”, Droit. ouv., July 2008, p. 369.

  14. 14.

    Saint-Jours Y., “Le suicide dans le droit de la Sécurité sociale”, D., 1970, Chr. p. 93.

  15. 15.

    Civ. 2e, 22 February 2007, n° 05-13.771.

  16. 16.

    As stated in Article L. 411-1 of the Social Security Code, “an accident that occurs as a result of or during their work to any salaried worker or any person working, in any capacity or location whatsoever, for one or more employers or entrepreneurs, is considered an industrial accident, irrespective of the cause”.

  17. 17.

    Soc. 13 June 1979, n° 78.10.115.

  18. 18.

    For another example, see Soc. 15 Feb. 2001, n° 99-17.406. In this case, the suicide of an employee in his office was classified as an industrial accident, on the grounds that it was established that the victim’s depressed state, which had led him to commit suicide, originated from a traffic accident he had a few months earlier, which was legally recognised as an industrial accident.

  19. 19.

    Civ. 2e, 18 Oct. 2005, n°04-30.305.

  20. 20.

    In practice, Social Security offices play an important role. Thus, they may, as in this case, challenge the link between suicide and work, but, on the contrary, by classifying a suicide as an industrial accident, they may also reinforce the link of causality to work.

  21. 21.

    Soc. 4 Feb. 1987, n°85-14.594.

  22. 22.

    Soc. 24 Jan. 2002, n°00-14.379.

  23. 23.

    For example, one Social security office did not hesitate to allege wilful misconduct on the part of the victim, who had taken cadmium cyanide to commit suicide, although he knew the fatal effect of the product, in order to exclude this fatality from the category of work-related accidents, Soc. 20 April 1988, n°86-15.690.

  24. 24.

    A Court of Appeal thus noted: “that it appeared from the evidence collected in inquiries conducted both by the police and by the Primary Health Insurance administration, that Mr. X was an anxious person, who was clearly much appreciated by his management, but was experiencing personal and financial difficulties”.

  25. 25.

    The Nîmes Court of Appeal, in a ruling issued on 9 May 2007, noted that, even if the employee suffered from narcolepsy and took “Modafinil” regularly, the technical data concerning the effects of this medication did not substantiate the conclusion that taking it could have caused his depression and that, furthermore, “neither of the victim’s doctors ever observed signs of depression or psychiatric illness in their patient”. On the contrary, witness testimony confirmed: “that the employee was overwhelmed by a feeling of insecurity at work and that he was constantly expected to meet higher objectives in his sales role”.

  26. 26.

    2nd Civ., 22 Feb. 2007, n°05-13.771; Lerouge L., “Accident du travail, obligation de sécurité de résultat de l’employeur et santé mentale”, note in 2nd Civ., 22 February 2007, Petites Affiches, 6 April 2007, n° 70, p. 16.

  27. 27.

    In this case, the evidence resulting in this conclusion was apparently well established: the employer’s authoritarian, vindictive, derogatory, rude behaviour, apparently unpaid overtime, threats of job cuts, etc.

  28. 28.

    Les Yvelines SST, 9 March 2010, n° 07-01.555.

  29. 29.

    Ginon A.-S., Guiomard F., “Le suicide peut-il constituer un risque professionnel?”, op. cit. p. 370.

  30. 30.

    Indeed, before 2007, a suicide had to be attributed to a specific event that occurred suddenly or unexpectedly at work, thus eliminating any idea of a “gradual” onset of suffering. See, Soc. 7 July 1994, n° 91-115.88.

  31. 31.

    Soc. 28 Feb. 2002, n° 99-17.201.

  32. 32.

    In relation to the restrictive definition given by the Court of Cassation in 1941, Cass. combined chambers, 15 July 1941, DC, 1941.117. The courts thus affirmed in 2002 that: “(…) failure to fulfil this [strict] obligation [of safety] is characterised as gross negligence, according to article L. 452-1 of the Social Security code, if the employer was or should have been aware of the danger to which the employees were exposed and did not take the necessary steps to protect them”.

  33. 33.

    Brun P., La responsabilité civile extra contractuelle, Litec 2005, n° 983.

  34. 34.

    The law of 9 April 1898 on work-related accidents and the law of 25 October 1919 on compensation for occupational diseases.

  35. 35.

    Victims of work-related accidents or occupational diseases, whose situation was covered by the provisions of the law dated 9 April 1898, were, consequently, severely penalised compared to the victims of non-work-related accidents.

  36. 36.

    Sargos P., “L’évolution du concept de sécurité au travail et ses conséquences en matière de responsabilité”, JCP S, 2003, I, 104, p. 121.

  37. 37.

    Recognition of the employer’s gross negligence led to an increase in the pension granted. Furthermore, the new definition of gross negligence broadened the scope of compensation for damages, Lerouge L., “Suicide du salarié et faute inexcusable de l’employeur: quelles évolutions juridiques?”, RDSS, n° 2, 2012, p. 373.

  38. 38.

    The Fauchon law of 10 July 2000 n° 2000-647 also facilitated this recognition, by overturning the unity of criminal and civil offences, so that the absence of a criminal offence no longer prevented victims from bringing a civil suit to prove gross negligence.

  39. 39.

    2nd Civ., 22 Feb. 2007, n°05-13.771.

  40. 40.

    Le Monde, 23 May 2011.

  41. 41.

    Versailles CA 19 May 2011, n° 10/00954.

  42. 42.

    Hauts-de-Seine SST, 17, December 2009, n° 08-01023/N.

  43. 43.

    It should be emphasised that the enterprise had only made questionnaires available to workers, who were not, furthermore, obliged to answer them.

  44. 44.

    Mahiou I., “L’action ambigüe des psys”, Santé et travail, n° 44, July 2003, p. 41.

  45. 45.

    The Lachmann report (H. Lachmann, Ch. Larose et M. Penicaud, Rapport bien être et efficacité au travail - 10 propositions pour améliorer la santé psychologique au travail, February 2010, p. 6) recommended an assessment of the social performance of managers with this in mind.

  46. 46.

    This also requires a limitation of ICT use during, as well outside, working hours. See: Supiot A., “Travail, droit et technique”, Dr. soc., 2002, p. 13.

  47. 47.

    Moreau M.-A., “Pour une politique de santé dans l’entreprise”, Dr. soc., 2002, p. 817.

  48. 48.

    Fantoni-Quinton S., “L’évolution du temps de travail et les enjeux relatifs à la santé des salariés”, Dr. soc., 2010, p. 395.

  49. 49.

    It is, for example, necessary for employers to pay attention to the work-personal life balance, as well as setting clear, realistic work objectives.

  50. 50.

    The complex system used to set employers’ annual contribution rates may thus affect its impact on prevention. Whereas it should promote prevention, the contribution rate varies partly according to the risk level of the enterprise, which may be skewed by the fact that it is based on a declaration, inspections are inadequate, and it results in pooled risks, thus weakening the individual variation in contributions, resulting in a lack of incentives for employers to implement preventive policies.

  51. 51.

    Supiot A., Critique du droit du travail, PUF, Coll. Les voies du droit, 1994, p. 67 and foll.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chloé Sablayrolles .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sablayrolles, C. (2017). Beyond Reparation, the Prevention of Work-Related Suicides. In: Lerouge, L. (eds) Psychosocial Risks in Labour and Social Security Law. Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63065-6_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics