Job reassignment following a takeover: Can an employee refuse instructions? What was the situation in this case?
The central issue in this ruling was whether an employee is obligated to accept a new position after his employer has been acquired and his previous position is eliminated. The employee in question worked at Mammoet Transport B.V. and managed a business unit. Following a takeover, he was offered a different role as an “advisor,” which he refused. Mammoet subsequently stopped paying his wages. The employee sued for continued payment of wages but lost the case.
The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which made it clear how carefully employers and employees must handle situations of this kind.
What does the law say about job changes?
The crux of this matter lies in Section 7:611 of the Civil Code. This section requires employers and employees to act as a “good employer” and a “good employee.” But what exactly does that mean in practice?
According to the Supreme Court, an employer may, in the event of changed circumstances (such as a takeover or reorganization), make a reasonable proposal to amend the employment contract. In principle, an employee may only refuse such a proposal if it cannot reasonably be expected of him or her.
When is a proposal “reasonable”?
Whether a proposal is reasonable depends on all the circumstances of the case. The Supreme Court states that you must consider:
- the nature of the change;
- the impact of the proposal on the employee;
- the employer's interests;
- the extent to which the proposal was carefully developed.
In this case, Mammoet had offered the employee a different, suitable position with the same salary and status, and the change was motivated by legitimate business interests following a takeover. The court therefore ruled that the offer was reasonable and that the employee had wrongfully refused it.
What does this mean for you as an employee?
You don’t have to blindly agree to every job reassignment. However, if there are objective reasons (such as a reorganization or merger) and the new position is reasonably comparable to your previous role, you are expected to cooperate.
If you refuse to do so without a valid reason, you risk losing your right to pay. In the worst-case scenario, it could even be considered a refusal to work, which could result in dismissal.
And what about employers?
It is essential for employers to carefully prepare for job changes:
- Be sure to document the reason for the change thoroughly.
- Involve the employee in the process at an early stage.
- Offer an alternative that matches their experience, salary, and skills.
- Put everything in writing.
That way, you demonstrate that you act like a good employer. And that’s crucial if a conflict arises.
What if you disagree with a change?
As an employee, it is important to object immediately if you disagree with a job reassignment. Do so in writing and explain your position. Then discuss whether there are any alternatives. In some cases, legal action may be necessary, but that is often a last resort.
Conclusion: Reasonableness and consultation are key
The Supreme Court’s ruling underscores that job reassignments are not a one-way street. Employers cannot make changes arbitrarily, but employees cannot simply refuse them either. Reasonableness, consultation, and a careful balancing of interests are key.
This blog was written by mr. Stijn Blom, employment lawyer at Arbeidsadvocaat.nl B.V. Stijn has extensive experience in employment law and supports entrepreneurs and employees on a daily basis with a variety of employment law issues. From dismissal cases to drafting watertight contracts and regulations - with his practical and personal approach, he helps employers and employees move forward. Want to know more? Visit Stijn's page.
Arbeidsadvocaat.nl is happy to assist you if you have any questions about being a good employee or a good employer. Please feel freeto contact us.
April 2025
