The qualification of sums paid to amateur licensed players by national and regional level clubs is a labor law issue before being a sports law issue. When the money paid does not reimburse any actual expense, and the player is required to attend training sessions and matches under penalty of sanctions, without declaring this to social and tax authorities, the athlete is considered an employee, regardless of whether the club signed a document with them. The lack of declaration constitutes hidden work. Labor courts and the criminal chamber have repeatedly ruled on these arrangements for footballers, rugby players, basketball players, and handball players. These decisions allow addressing four key questions: where the reimbursement of expenses ends and the salary begins; when the employment contract exists; what characterizes hidden work; and what reclassification produces and within what time frames. Where does the reimbursement of expenses end and the salary begin? Can an amateur club pay its players? Yes, but no text prohibits a sports association from paying a player, as long as it is declared. The word "amateur" qualifies the player's license and the championship in which the club competes, not the player's situation in labor law. The Sports Code defines a professional sports employee as any person "whose remunerated activity is the exercise of a sports activity in a legal subordination relationship with a sports association or a company." A player paid by a club such as a football club in National 2, a rugby club in Fédérale 2, or a handball club in Nationale 3 falls under this definition. The notions of high-level sport or federal status are irrelevant. A social law regime applies to the amateur licensed athlete as well as the professional, as long as three conditions are met. The Court of Cassation ruled on a football player under an amateur license employed by a club: "the footballer who is employed to exercise, exclusively or mainly, his activity for competitions, is a professional footballer," regardless of his license. The federal football system has drawn the consequences: the Statute of the federal player of the French Football Federation provides that for the season 2026-2027, a player made available to a National 1, National 2, or Regional 1 club against remuneration is an employee, under a federal contract, with a minimum salary. The useful question is therefore not whether the club has the right to pay, but what it actually pays: expenses or a salary that does not say its name. Real expenses or monthly lump sum: the dividing line. A reimbursement of expenses covers a cost incurred by the player for the club, with proof or at the kilometer rate, and it varies with the actual travel. A fixed amount paid each month regardless of the distance traveled, including months without travel, is a salary. From when does the employment contract exist? The three criteria applied to the amateur licensed athlete. The employment contract exists as soon as three elements are combined: a work performance (training, matches, club events); a remuneration that is not the reimbursement of an expense; and a subordination link, that is, a power of direction, control, and sanction from the club over the player. The burden of proof lies with the person invoking the employment contract, and it is administered by a bundle of indicators: regularity and fixity of payments, absence of correlation with expenses, obligations imposed on the player, power of sanction reserved by the club. The most controversial point is subordination. Clubs argue that the obligation to attend training is inherent to team sports. The Court of Cassation rejected the argument: when the agreement provides that the player is required, "under penalty of disciplinary sanctions," to participate in competitions and train according to the club's directives, and he receives a fixed monthly allowance, there is an employment contract. The athlete does not have to establish that a sanction was imposed: it is sufficient that the club reserved the power to impose one. A clause of immediate suspension of the agreement in case of breach is also sufficient. Another regularly opposed argument: the player performs another professional activity and can therefore not be a professional athlete. The reason is deemed inoperative since a 2011 ruling for a rugby player, a full-time delivery driver, paid 1,800 euros per month of "expenses." What characterizes hidden work? The material element and the proof of intent. There is hidden work by concealment of employment when an employer intentionally refrains from making the prior declaration to the employment, from submitting a payslip or declaring salaries and contributions. A club that pays a player in expenses without declaring it almost always meets the material element. The debate is on intent. Fixed payments disguised as expenses, negotiated player by player, when actual travel costs little; false travel lists; the transition from a declared salary to undeclared allowances for the same activity; or even protocols and counter-letters hidden from the federation, are considered proof of intent. Configurations in which intent is excluded. Intent is not systematically retained, which must be assessed before initiating a procedure. In an association managed by volunteers, where "the limit between salaried work and personal commitment is difficult to determine," it may not be established. The mere absence of payslips is not sufficient when contributions have been deducted. The judge can finally accept the employment contract of a Fédérale 3 player while rejecting hidden work. Requalification and the hidden work allowance are therefore two distinct debates: the second requires documents establishing that the club knew. What requalification produces and within what time frames. The claims. When the employment contract is recognized, the player can obtain the payment of what should have been paid to him, calculated on the applicable minimum and not on the amounts received, the paid holidays, a lump sum equal to six months' salary if hidden work is recognized, and when the club terminated before the end of the season, the allowances attached to the early termination of a fixed-term contract. The six-month allowance is due "in case of termination of the employment relationship," regardless of the mode, and the jurisprudence allows its cumulation with the allowances due for the termination. It is calculated on the reconstructed salary, not on the expenses paid: a case involving a few hundred euros per month can represent an issue unrelated to the amounts received. The calculation of the salary recall. The salary recall results from the difference between the minimum applicable to the sport and the division concerned and the amounts actually received. This minimum is not unique: it depends on the classification group of the national sports collective agreement in which the employment is ranked and, if applicable, the applicable federal status. In Fédérale 3, the court of appeal had adopted the minimum of the national sports collective agreement. A less visible effect: the regularization of contributions resulting from requalification opens the player, for the concerned period, to the social protection attached to employment, notably the rights to retirement and the coverage of work accidents. A nuance from the same decision: during the suspension of the contract for a work stoppage resulting from an injury in a match, the salary is due only if a text, the collective agreement, or the contract imposes it. Three time frames running in parallel. Salaries can be claimed over three years and, when the relationship is terminated, over the three years preceding the termination. The action for recognition of the employee status, a personal action, prescribes after five years from the day on which its holder became or should have become aware of the facts allowing it to be exercised, in practice the end of the relationship. The challenge to the termination must be initiated within twelve months. In sports, the relationship usually ends almost always in June: each month that passes makes a month's salary irrecoverable. The dispute falls under the labor court, whose jurisdiction cannot be excluded by contrary stipulations of the federal regulations or the agreement signed with the club. The respective risks of the player and the club. The accusations of hidden work target only the employer. The unpaid contributions are due by the club, which is exposed to a rectification, to the specific surcharge for hidden work, and to the cancellation of the reductions and exemptions from contributions, as well as to criminal proceedings, including against its leaders. The player is not without exposure, however. The amounts reclassified as salary are taxable; if he has received allocations from France Travail or the CAF, or if he himself has prepared inaccurate travel sheets, his own situation is examined before taking action. These points do not prevent a procedure; they modify its preparation. As for the fear, often expressed, of losing his license or not finding another club, the license is the concern of the federation, while the existence of an employment contract is a factual question that does not depend on it. The pressures from a leader are an element of the case, not a legal obstacle. Recurring objections in defense. Four arguments recur in these disputes. The amount at stake would be too low. The claim is not calculated on what the club paid, but on what it should have paid for the time devoted, increased if applicable by six months' salary. The monthly amount does not change the qualification; it changes the calculation. The club would request the reimbursement of the expenses paid. If the amounts are reclassified as salary, they remunerate work provided and do not need to be reimbursed; they are instead charged against the salary recall. The threat is frequent and baseless. The solution would differ according to the sport or division. The rule is the same for any athlete paid by his club, in Fédérale 2 rugby, NM2 basketball, or N2 handball: the qualification depends on the facts, not the discipline or level. What varies is the applicable convention or status, hence the minimum used for the calculation. The player would remain an amateur. Before his federation, his license remains that of an amateur; before the labor judge, he is an employee for the concerned period, as long as he has performed a sports activity for an employer, against remuneration and in a subordination relationship. The numbered examples cited in this article are typical reconstructed situations.