Variable compensation and salary continuation during illness

14 November 2024

Variable compensation and salary continuation during illness

By Anja Blijham

During the first two years of illness, an employee has the right to receive at least 70% of their salary.

The question arises regarding the payment of variable components of the salary, such as commission, bonuses, or overtime pay during sickness. Is an employer obligated to continue paying these components during an employee’s illness?

Salary: Fixed and Variable Compensation

The obligation to continue paying salary during illness has a broad interpretation. This means that the requirement to continue payment extends beyond just the base salary and vacation allowance of an employee. If an employee is entitled to a possible thirteenth-month bonus, overtime hours, or additional allowances, these also form part of the salary to be paid. The same applies to commission or bonuses, which should generally be paid based on the type of compensation.

Variable Performance-Dependent Compensation

If a variable portion of an employee’s salary is dependent on their performance, the employee is entitled to at least 70% of the average salary they would have earned if they were not ill. This also applies to performance-related bonuses that the employee could not achieve due to illness.

It must be plausible that the employee would have achieved these performances if they were not ill. A written agreement stating that an employee forfeits their bonus during sickness is not legally valid. The rules regarding salary continuation during illness are mandatory, and agreements that deviate to the detriment of the employee are not permissible.

Variable Non-Performance-Dependent Compensation

Variable compensations not linked to an employee’s performance do not fall under the obligation to continue payment during illness. For example, a profit-sharing based on the overall profit of the employer in a specific year is not included. However, there are instances where an employee may still claim a profit-sharing even if they were ill in that year. The principle of good employer practice determines whether an employer is obligated to continue paying this form of variable compensation to a sick employee.

Conclusion

During the initial two years of illness, an employee generally has the right to receive at least 70% of their salary. When it comes to variable compensations like commissions and bonuses, a decision must be made on whether these should also be paid during sickness. Performance-dependent variable compensations are typically required to be paid, while non-performance-dependent ones such as profit-sharing are not automatically covered by the salary continuation obligation. If you have any questions regarding the payment or allocation of variable compensations during sickness, feel free to reach out to us.

More information

Do you have questions about the payment or allocation of a variable bonus during illness? Or do you have other questions on similar topics? Please feel free to contact us.

Related blogs

Previous slide
Next slide

11 February 2026

Love in the workplace: boundless?

Valentine’s Day is approaching once again, which raises the question: what should be done if a romantic relationship between colleagues leads to tension and problems in the workplace? If such a relationship has a negative impact on work performance or the working atmosphere, is an employer allowed to prohibit a relationship between employees, or to impose limits? These questions regularly arise in practice and legal proceedings.

Read more

Read more about

22 January 2026

What to do if an employee does not cooperate with reintegration?

When an employee is (long-term) sick, reintegration is a joint obligation of both the employee and the employer. But what if the employee refuses to cooperate in this process? What can you do according to the law? What steps are required?

Read more

Read more about

15 January 2026

Works council’s right to be consulted in an international group

The works council (ondernemingsraad, OR) is entitled to all information that it “reasonably” needs to provide advice on, for example, a reorganisation.

Read more

Read more about

3 December 2025

Don’t count the number of warnings

That five official warnings do not automatically justify a lawful dismissal was once again confirmed in a recent ruling by the Gelderland Subdistrict Court.

Read more

Read more about

30 October 2025

Heineken employee facing termination? We offer legal advice

Heineken has announced a large-scale reorganisation, as a result of which many positions will become redundant. Those employees will be offered a settlement agreement to which a so-called social plan will apply. If this applies to you, please continue reading…

Read more

Read more about
All articles