THE BOTTOM LINE
- Documentation is Paramount: A clear, signed agreement regarding changes to an employee’s role and salary proved crucial for the employer, even when their subsequent communications created confusion. Always formalize changes to terms and conditions in writing.
- Minor Disputes Carry Major Risks: This case is a stark reminder of how a technical disagreement over a Collective Labour Agreement (CAO) clause can escalate into a complete breakdown of trust, ultimately making the employment relationship untenable and leading to costly legal proceedings.
- Termination During Sick Leave is Possible: A Dutch court can terminate an employment contract even when an employee is on sick leave, provided the reason for termination—in this case, a severely damaged relationship—is proven to be unrelated to the illness itself.
THE DETAILS
This case involved a long-serving employee of 24 years who, after a period of illness, agreed to move to a less physically demanding role. To protect his income, the employer structured his new salary as a combination of a lower base pay and a personal allowance, effectively freezing his previous earnings. This arrangement, designed to comply with the applicable Collective Labour Agreement (CAO) for older employees changing roles, was documented and signed by the employee in early 2022. The agreement specified that future CAO-based pay rises would apply to the base salary and would gradually reduce the personal allowance.
The relationship began to unravel two years later when the employee, supported by his union, challenged the salary structure, arguing that the CAO was being misapplied. The situation worsened when the employer gave conflicting explanations about the specific CAO article justifying their approach, a misstep that significantly eroded the employee’s trust. The conflict escalated dramatically, with the employee accusing the company of fabricating documents, spreading negativity among colleagues, and being uncooperative during re-integration efforts. Multiple attempts at mediation failed to bridge the growing divide.
The District Court of Midden-Nederland ultimately sided with the employer. It first dismissed the employee’s claims for back pay, ruling that the signed 2022 agreement was clear and that the employer’s application of the CAO was correct, despite their clumsy communications. Crucially, the court then granted the employer’s request to terminate the contract. It found that the working relationship was “severely and permanently disturbed” due to the employee’s deep-seated distrust and confrontational actions, making any future collaboration impossible. The court determined that this breakdown was independent of the employee’s concurrent illness, thus navigating the strict Dutch rules that normally prohibit termination during sick leave. The employee was awarded the statutory transition payment, but his request for additional “fair compensation” was denied, as the court found no serious misconduct on the employer’s part.
SOURCE
Source: Rechtbank Midden-Nederland
