Introduction
Can an employer just hire someone else for your position during illness? And what if, after years of good performance, you drop out with pulmonary CAVID and suddenly find yourself in the cafeteria? In a recent ruling by the District Court of The Hague, a long-term sick production manager faced just such a situation. The judge ruled harshly on the employer's behavior and awarded the employee substantial damages. In this blog you can read why.
The situation: sick employee sidelined
The employee in question was a production manager and received good reviews for many years. Due to lung CAVID, he dropped out for a long time. During his reintegration, however, it turned out that his old position had already been filled by someone else. The new employee was given his workplace, while the original employee was tucked away in the cafeteria with hardly any substantive work, in fact he was left with nothing but some reading and going home again.
This approach made it clear that the employer no longer wanted to continue with him, and that true reintegration was out of the question.
Resignation request and repayment demanded by employer
The employer asked the subdistrict court to terminate the employment. The reason? The employee was allegedly performing inadequately because of his sick leave. In addition, the employer demanded repayment of the full salary and car allowance during the period of illness, together amounting to almost €260,000.
The court had to consider whether this was a legitimate request, or whether this was cross-border employer behavior.
Judge's verdict: employer acted seriously culpable
The district judge swept the request from the table. The judge found that the employer had deliberately frustrated the reintegration process by hiring someone else and making the original position unattainable. This excluded the employee from a fair return to his former position, even though he was entitled to it, especially given his years of effort and good performance.
In addition, it was unreasonable to argue that the sick leave could be blamed on the employee, let alone that he should have to repay salary. The failure due to pulmonary COVID was through no fault of his own.
Substantial compensation for the employee
The court found serious culpable conduct by the employer and awarded the employee fair compensation of €250,000. On top of that, he received:
- a transition allowance of over €16,000, and
- full reimbursement of his attorney fees at €8,000.
The judge emphasized that the employer abused procedural law by knowingly filing a chance request and, moreover, attempting to recover wages.
Conclusion
This ruling clearly shows that employers cannot simply dismiss an employee when sick, let alone hire someone else for a current position. Reintegration is a serious obligation, and sidelining a sick employee can have major financial consequences. For employees, this case is an important affirmation of the right to protection and recovery, even in difficult circumstances such as prolonged illness due to pulmonary CAVID.
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 think with you if you have questions about dismissal. Please feel free to contact us .
April 2025
