Introduction
May an employer fire an employee for asking critical questions about policies within the organization? And what if the employer thereby bases the dismissal on grounds that turn out to be incorrect? In a recent decision of the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch, exactly this was the central issue. The employee was ultimately not only vindicated, but also awarded substantial compensation. This case shows the importance of care in dismissal and the protection of empowered employees who ask critical questions.
The situation: asking questions leads to loss of function
The employee was employed by TP Vision, a company that manufactures and sells audio and video products worldwide under the 'Philips' name. Within the company, she and some colleagues raised critical questions about certain views of management. Instead of an open discussion about this, she was invited to the management and there told that her position was to be terminated.
UWV denies permission for dismissal, employer seeks further relief
The employer applied to the UWV for permission to dismiss on business economic grounds. The UWV rejected this request because it was insufficiently substantiated. The employer then went to the subdistrict court, where it argued no less than four other grounds for dismissal.
The employee did not leave it at that: she approached fourteen colleagues on her own initiative and managed to save their responses (secretly) and use them in the legal proceedings. This was not blamed on her by the judge; indeed, it helped her case.
Judge's verdict: dismissal unjustified and seriously culpable
The subdistrict court ruled that the employer had not sufficiently demonstrated that the position was actually to be abolished. The other grounds for dismissal did not stand up either. It seemed that the employee was "sent away" mainly because she dared to ask critical questions.
Thereby, according to the court, the employer had acted in a seriously culpable manner. The employee received:
- a transitional payment of €18,500,
- as well as equitable compensation of €55,000.
The judge still gave the employer the option to withdraw the dismissal and reinstate the employee. If the employer did so, it would not have to pay the fees.
What can we learn from this?
This ruling makes it clear that employees have the right to ask questions and express themselves critically within the organization, without this having to lead to dismissal. Employers who try to "silence" critical employees run the risk of substantial financial penalties, especially if the dismissal is not properly substantiated.
Moreover, the case shows that even when an employee takes action on their own (such as collecting statements), it does not have to work directly against them. If done carefully, it can actually contribute to evidence of wrongdoing.
Conclusion
A critical attitude in the workplace should not be grounds for dismissal. Employers who try this should take into account the strict requirements of judges as well as the risk of high compensation payments. This ruling confirms the importance of transparency, careful substantiation of grounds for dismissal, and respect for employees who constructively make their voices heard by asking critical questions.
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
