Introduction
Employers may decide to provide financial relief to employees in special situations, such as an expense allowance for specific private circumstances. But what if such an allowance is not spent for its intended purpose? In a recent ruling, an employee was summarily dismissed for structurally misusing the allowance for a dog walking service. The judge ruled that there had been a serious breach of trust. This blog discusses the case and the legal considerations.
The case: compensation for dog walking service
An account manager received additional support from his employer after his personal circumstances changed due to a divorce. The employee's dog stayed in his apartment, but walking it was difficult to combine with his working hours. To accommodate the employee, the employer provided a monthly expense allowance of €108, intended for hiring a dog walking service.
This arrangement was made exclusively for this employee and was explicitly tied to caring for the dog through a professional service.
What went wrong?
Initially, the allowance was used correctly. Over time, however, the employee no longer used the dog walking service, while the monthly allowance continued. Only months later did the employer discover that the service had not been used since December, even though the allowance had been paid.
When confronted with this, the employee explained that he had used the money to give gifts to friends and relatives, as thanks for walking the dog. The employer did not accept this explanation and decided to proceed with summary dismissal.
Judge's verdict
The subdistrict court found in favor of the employer and ruled that the summary dismissal was legally valid. Among other things, the following was taken into consideration:
- The expense allowance was strictly for an outside dog walking service.
- The employee had purposefully failed to follow this destination for six months.
- He had not communicated this on his own accord.
- When confronted, he gave an evasive statement without remorse or full disclosure.
The judge emphasized that transparency and honesty are core values within an employment relationship. Especially when there is an individual, trust-based arrangement, its abuse can qualify as seriously culpable behavior.
Important lesson for workers
This ruling underscores that employees must handle expense reimbursements with care, especially when they are granted for a specific purpose. Alternative spending, however well intended, is in principle not allowed without consultation or permission from the employer.
Employees are wise to report changes in the use of compensation in a timely and complete manner. When in doubt, it is advisable to seek explicit approval to avoid discussions or sanctions.
Conclusion
An expense allowance is not a freely spendable perk, but a purposive arrangement based on trust. Failure to comply with the purpose can result in serious culpability, with instant dismissal as a possible consequence. This case makes clear that even with relatively small amounts, the standards of fairness and openness weigh heavily in the legal assessment.
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 expense reimbursement. Please feel free to get in touch .
April 2025
