Introduction
At first glance, timekeeping seems like an administrative formality, but it plays a crucial role in the relationship of trust between employee and employer. Especially for employees in a managerial position, integrity is essential here. In a recent ruling by the 's-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal, a manager in greenhouse horticulture was summarily dismissed for structural manipulation of his time records. The case illustrates how judges deal with fraud in the workplace and where the boundaries lie for employers and employees.
Fiddling with timekeeping: the greenhouse manager's case
The case involved a manager who was responsible for his own timekeeping, as well as being authorized to make manual corrections. This led to suspicion by the employer, who found that the manager was correcting his clock times remarkably often. In response, the company decided to install three cameras on the shop floor to further investigate the employee's behavior.
The hidden cameras and what they showed
The cameras, placed in the cafeteria, smoking room and work area, revealed that the manager often began his workday by smoking and drinking coffee while already clocked in. Although he claimed to regularly work overtime, those extra hours could not be substantiated. The footage confirmed that his actual working hours did not match those recorded.
Although the use of hidden cameras is legally sensitive, it was permissible in this case because of the suspicion of serious fraud and the employee's leadership position.
The court's opinion
The manager argued that it was common practice within the company to be lenient with clock times. This would mean that his behavior was actually condoned. The judge did not go along with this because he could not make this plausible. According to the employer, on the contrary, they are very strict in checking hours. Moreover, as a supervisor, the manager had an exemplary role and enjoyed extra trust from his employer. By systematically abusing his powers, he had seriously violated that trust.
The court ruled that the summary dismissal was justified. The employee still asked for compensation of €100,000 for wrongful dismissal, but this request was rejected. Indeed, he was ordered to pay approximately €8,000 in litigation costs to his former employer.
Integrity and exemplary behavior
This case shows that not only the actual behavior but also the context in which it takes place is of great importance. A manager or team leader is expected to be a role model. In such positions, missteps carry more weight, especially if there is deliberate use of authority that others do not have.
Hoursheet fraud in that context is not seen as an incident, but as a fundamental violation of the employment relationship. This can lead to summary dismissal even without warning, with all the consequences - including financial.
Conclusion
Tampering with hours is not an innocent mistake, especially if it is done knowingly and repeatedly by someone in a position of trust. Employers may take strict action against such behavior, and judges appear to support it, under the right circumstances. This ruling underscores the importance of integrity in the workplace, and shows that summary dismissal can be justified in cases of serious abuse of trust.
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
