Начар көрсөткүчтөр кыскача жумуштан бошотуу үчүн шашылыш себеп эмес: Нидерландия соту мыйзамсыз жумуштан бошотуу маселесин оңдойт

An employer who believes an employee is underperforming faces a dilemma: how do you address that without crossing a legal line? A recent ruling by the Limburg District Court (ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2026:5188) shows what goes wrong when an employer skips that step altogether and reaches straight for the most severe measure available under Dutch эмгек укугу: summary dismissal (ontslag op staande voet). The bill presented for that mistake turned out to be steep.

Фактылар

The employee, born in 1968, had worked as a demolition worker for a construction company since November 2024. His fixed-term employment contract had just been extended for another year in November 2025. Privately, things were difficult: a permanent knee injury forced him to close his one-person window-cleaning business, leaving him unable to keep up payments on a wheelchair-accessible van leased for his stepdaughter. When he asked his employer for a loan or a wage advance, the request was refused. The van was subsequently auctioned off, leaving him with a residual debt.On 12 January 2026, the employer summarily dismissed him. The dismissal letter referred to ongoing complaints about his pace of work, time registration, attitude and motivation, and to a lack of improvement despite earlier warnings. The employee disputed all of this and stated that he had never received a formal warning or a concrete improvement plan.

Начар көрсөткүчтөр кыскача баяндаманы четке кагууну актай албайт

The subdistrict court made short work of the employer’s defence. An urgent cause within the meaning of Section 7:677 of the Dutch Civil Code requires conduct on the part of the employee that makes it unreasonable to expect the employer to continue the employment relationship. Underperformance does not, in principle, meet that threshold, especially where the allegations in the dismissal letter remain vague and unsubstantiated.The court stressed that Dutch law requires an employer who wants to dismiss an employee for poor performance to first offer a genuine and realistic opportunity to improve. That means a concrete improvement plan, interim evaluation, and clarity about the consequences if improvement fails to materialise. None of this had been demonstrated here. In fact, the contract had been extended for another year less than two months before the dismissal, which sits uneasily with the picture of a structurally underperforming employee.The court therefore concluded that the summary dismissal was not lawful.

Мыйзам долбоору: үч башка сыйлык

Because the employee accepted the termination of his employment rather than seeking its annulment, while the summary dismissal proved unlawful, the subdistrict court awarded him three separate compensation amounts at once.First, the fixed statutory damages under Section 7:672(11) of the Dutch Civil Code: the wages over the notice period that would have applied to a regular termination. In this case, partly due to a collective labour agreement provision on terminations taking effect at the end of a calendar week, that amounted to just over four thousand euros gross.Second, the statutory transition payment. An urgent cause is not automatically the same as seriously culpable conduct on the part of the employee, and since no urgent cause was found to exist, there was no basis to deny the transition payment either.The heaviest award was the fair compensation (billijke vergoeding) under Section 7:681 of the Dutch Civil Code, which the court set at just over twenty-three thousand euros gross, equal to six months’ salary. In calculating this amount, the court took into account that the employee suddenly had to look for new work without any transition period, that he had since found work but only through a temp agency and therefore on an insecure basis, that he had needed dozens of job applications, and that the employer had deliberately avoided a proper performance-improvement process by resorting instead to an improper summary dismissal. The court also weighed in the employee’s pressing personal financial situation, which he had previously raised with his employer.

Бул жумуш берүүчүлөр үчүн эмнени билдирет

This ruling is a clear warning. Dissatisfaction with an employee’s performance, however justified that dissatisfaction may be, is not a licence for summary dismissal. An employer who wants to dismiss an employee for poor performance must first follow the regular route: concrete, written feedback, an improvement plan with clear goals and timelines, and interim evaluation. Only once that process has run its course without result does terminating the employment relationship become an option, and even then only through the proper legal channel, not through the most extreme remedy of summary dismissal.An employer who deliberately bypasses this route risks not only having the dismissal set aside, but also having it qualified as seriously culpable conduct. The resulting fair compensation can far exceed the cost of a properly conducted improvement process. Diligence, in other words, pays off quite literally.

Көп берилүүчү суроолор

Аягында

Бул окуя жумуш берүүчүлөр үчүн начар иштеген кызматкерлер менен иштешүүдө туура жол-жобону сактоо канчалык маанилүү экенин жана ал жол-жобо этибарга алынбаган учурда канчалык кымбатка тураарын көрсөтүп турат. Эгер сиз начар иштеген кызматкер менен иштешкен жумуш берүүчү болсоңуз же кыска мөөнөттүү жумуштан бошотууга туш болгон кызматкер болсоңуз, биз менен байланышуудан тартынбаңыз. Law & More сиздин өзгөчө кырдаалыңызга ылайыкташтырылган кеңеш алуу үчүн.