International employment law: insights from the Netherlands

In this month’s episode, Barry Stanton is joined by Matthijs Roest Crollius of Doorn en Keizer in Amsterdam with whom Barry has collaborated on a variety of projects over the years.

Their conversation explores a range of employment law issues, highlighting key differences around termination of employment in the different jurisdictions and how these reflect broader cultural and political ideologies. Unlike in the UK, where termination can be managed through contractual provisions and notice periods, Dutch employers must often seek external approval. The discussion begins with dismissals on “economic grounds,” which require an employer to obtain permission from the UWV, the Employee Insurance Agency. They then explore other dismissal scenarios, including termination for “inadequate performance.” In such cases, employers must implement a formal performance improvement plan (PIP) lasting between three and six months and where the court will have to grant permission.

A recurring challenge for employers arises when an employee goes on sick leave, as Dutch employment law provides strong protections against dismissal during illness. We discuss how to avoid that problem arising, and the role of the company doctor in determining whether an employee is genuinely unfit for work.

Attention also turns to the enforceability of restrictive covenants, a crucial topic for employers looking to protect their business interests when key personnel depart. Finally, recent legislative changes affecting on-call or zero-hours contracts are explored, an area of increasing scrutiny by governments seeking to improve worker protections. In the Netherlands, new rules introduce minimum notice periods, minimum on-call periods, and the creation of a formal permanent contract after 12 months.