Can summary dismissal for teaching Zumba class during working hours stand?
Instant dismissal is a drastic measure that is justified only in exceptional cases. But what happens when an employee uses her work time to work for another employer, without a clear agreement? This played out recently in a case that was submitted to the court. The case involved a residential supervisor who decided to teach Zumba classes for another employer on a workday while she was scheduled to work for her own job. The summary dismissal, which was imposed on her, eventually came before the court.
The situation: What exactly happened?
The employee had been working at Pameijer care facility for six years. One day, she was scheduled to work from 1 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.. Around 6 p.m., however, she left her workplace to teach Zumba class at another employer. Her manager discovered her absence during the class and decided to summarily fire her. The reason for the dismissal was that her leaving during her working hours had resulted in a shortage of supervisors at the workplace.
The employee's defense
The employee disagreed with the dismissal and took her case to court. She argued that she had taken her overtime that day to teach the dance class and that her co-worker was aware of her temporary absence. In addition, the employee defended herself by arguing that it was customary within the organization to decide when overtime could be compensated. According to her, this would be an unwritten rule within Pameijer.
The judge's ruling
The judge ruled that summary dismissal was excessive in this case. Several colleagues confirmed that there were indeed unwritten rules regarding overtime compensation, which Pameijer had not convincingly disputed. Instant dismissal was therefore considered too harsh a measure. Instead of immediate summary dismissal, an official warning would have sufficed for the employer. The employee was awarded severance pay in the amount of approximately €11,000. Had she been able to prove more damages, this amount might have been higher.
What does this mean for employees and employers?
This case highlights the importance of clear agreements and communication between employees and employers. Even when there are unwritten rules within an organization, both parties need to clearly understand what expectations are in place regarding working hours, overtime and other terms and conditions of employment. This case demonstrates that summary dismissal is not always the appropriate response, especially when there are ambiguities about the rules that apply within the organization.
This blog was written by Mr. Stijn Blom, employment lawyer at Arbeidsadvocaat.nl B.V. Stijn has extensive experience in employment law and assists entrepreneurs daily with a wide range of employment-related matters. From dismissal cases to drafting watertight contracts and policies – 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 summary dismissal. Please feel free to contact us .
April 2025
