25 June 2012

It’s my way or the high way’-approach costs employer small fortune

By GMW lawyers

In a recent judgment (LJN: BW1460), the Dutch sub district Court emphasised once again the importance of having a complete personnel file of malfunctioning when seeking dissolution of an employment contract.

The lack of such a file cost the employer in this case € 300.000,-.

According to the sub district Court, the employer was unable to prove sufficiently that the employee was malfunctioning. Moreover, the employer did not give the employee enough opportunity to improve himself. Having established itself recently in the Netherlands and thus unfamiliar with Dutch employment law was no excuse for the international employer.

Background information

The employee started working for the international company in 2008, with business locations in Asia and North-America. In 2011, he was promoted to Human Resources manager. During his first evaluation as manager in January 2012, he was informed by his employer that he did not perform the job effectively. According to his employer, the employee failed to take (enough) responsibility for his department and he did not respond correctly to criticism. Moreover, the employee engaged in emotional unstable behavior which did not match the culture of the organisation. Only five days after this evaluation, the employer suspended the employee, blocked his email-account and requested the sub district Court to dissolve the employment agreement.

Different management style

The sub district Court was apparently not amused by the employer’s line of actions. In the judge’s opinion, the employee had performed his tasks properly since the beginning of his employment relation. No kind of malfunctioning could be proven sufficiently to the Court. In addition, the alleged malfunctioning had not been explicitly pointed out to the employee. From the personnel file, it could only be proven that the employee might have had a different management style. However, another management style does not necessarily result in incapability of performing ones duties, according to the Court.

Performance Improvement Plan

The sub district Court neither agreed with the statements of the employer that a Performance Improvement Plan had been given to the employee. As the lapse of time between the evaluation and the request to the sub district Court to dissolve the employment agreement was only a week, it did not sound very credible that the employer actually gave the employee the opportunity to improve himself. The employee was not even provided the opportunity to write down his own comments in reply to his evaluation. This way of handling, in combination with the suspension and blocking the email-account of the employee, made the employer acting against what is expected from an employer in the Netherlands. Having established itself recently in the Netherlands and thus unfamiliarity with Dutch employment law was not a valid excuse for the international employer. According to the Court, due to the current dispute, dissolution of the employment agreement was inevitable. However, the employee was entitled to a compensation of € 300.000,-.

Conclusion

In the Netherlands, it is important for an employer to start writing a Performance Improvement Plan if an employee is performing poorly. Furthermore, it is of great importance to start monitoring all the efforts undertaken to coach the (malfunctioning) employee. In this case, the employer’s behaviour was clearly unacceptable, according to what is expected from employers in the Netherlands, which resulted in the employee making a small fortune. Still, be aware that employers in the Netherlands, relying on the slogan, ‘”It’s my way or the highway”, could start saving money, as in most cases, judges won’t hesitate granting an ample compensation to the employee, when an employer lacks a complete personnel file.

Are you facing dismissal? Get help

Get legal advice that you can trust. Meet our team of experts or contact me at your convenience.

GMW-lawyers

GMW lawyers

Lawyer

Our lawyers each have their own specialist expertise and experience. What they share is their drive and service-oriented approach. With the aim of achieving the best solution for our clients.

Related blogs

Previous slide
Next slide

12 February 2025

Gross misconduct by employer due to breach of reintegration obligations

An employer may request the court to terminate an employment contract on the grounds of a disrupted working relationship. In some cases, the court grants termination and concludes that the disruption resulted from gross misconduct by the employer. Such cases are exceptional.

Read more

Read more about

5 February 2025

A Promise is a Debt (in principle)

Can an employer retract a (verbal) promise to extend an employee’s contract? In principle, no. A promise is a debt.

Read more

Read more about

3 February 2025

Taking action against damage to employer reputation

Most employers include confidentiality clauses in employment and termination agreements.

Read more

Read more about

29 January 2025

Strengthening Works Council Rights in Bankruptcy Cases

For the second time in five years, a proposed bill was open for public consultation, introducing new rules that automatically transfer employees to the acquiring company during a restart after bankruptcy.

Read more

Read more about

20 January 2025

Respecting co-determination rights

Works councils do not often take legal action against their own management. Typically, they try to resolve disputes through constructive dialogue with the management or entrepreneur, which is often the preferred approach. However, if dialogue fails, works councils (WC) have several legal avenues available.

Read more

Read more about
All articles