The community service order, i.e., a judicial order to a convicted offender to perform unpaid work in the community as a supplement or an alternative to incarceration, combines the penal philosophies of punishment, atonement, and rehabilitation. Charitable and social service organizations have willingly accepted such workers. Even trade unions, despite high unemployment, do not object, provided offenders do not replace any salaried employee. The offenders themselves benefit from community service sentences by acquiring habits of self-discipline and reliability indispensable to their social reintegration. A new self-image as a useful member of society replaces the label of social misfits and daily contacts with selfless, dedicated coworkers provide new role models for individuals used to associating with ruthless, violent pleasure-seekers. Even habitual lawbreakers realize that there is more to society than the simplistic exploiter-exploited dichotomy. Prospects for the community work order sentence must be organized, suitable tasks chosen, and adequate performance evaluation technique devised to make this alternative a success. The pilot programs operating in England since 1973 do not yet offer conclusive evidence of a lower recidivism rate than, for example, probation. However, its cost effectiveness, added to the benefits to the offenders, recommend it highly to progressive penologists. The United States is experimenting with the community work order alternative in several States. Difficulties in introducing this desirable substitute penalty in France do not come from legislators (always willing to legislate progress in all areas) but from local conditions (e.g., fewer governmental social service agencies than in Anglo-Saxon countries and bureaucratic delays in implementing new laws), but these obstacles can be negotiated. Explanatory footnotes include bibliographic references.