{"id":6056,"date":"2025-04-22T07:41:09","date_gmt":"2025-04-22T04:41:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/arbeidsadvocaat.nl\/long-covid-can-you-be-replaced-just-like-that-this-judge-says-no\/"},"modified":"2026-08-16T15:46:25","modified_gmt":"2026-08-16T12:46:25","slug":"long-covid-can-you-be-replaced-just-like-that-this-judge-says-no","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/arbeidsadvocaat.nl\/en\/long-covid-can-you-be-replaced-just-like-that-this-judge-says-no\/","title":{"rendered":"Long COVID: Can You Be Replaced Just Like That? This Judge Says No."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

Can an employer simply hire someone else to fill your position while you\u2019re on sick leave? And what if, after years of good performance, you\u2019re sidelined by long COVID and suddenly find yourself working in the cafeteria? In a recent ruling by the District Court of The Hague<\/a>, a production manager on long-term sick leave faced exactly this situation. The judge was harsh in his assessment of the employer\u2019s conduct and awarded the employee substantial damages. In this blog, you\u2019ll learn why. <\/p>\n\n

The Situation: Sick Employee Sidelined<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

The employee in question was a production manager and had received positive performance reviews for years. He was on long-term leave due to long COVID. However, during his return-to-work process<\/a>, it turned out that his former position had already been filled by someone else. The new employee took over his workstation, while the original employee was shuffled off to the cafeteria with hardly any meaningful work to do; in fact, he had nothing left to do but read a bit and go home. <\/p>\n\n

This approach made it clear that the employer no longer wanted to continue working with him, and that there was no real reintegration.<\/p>\n\n

Request for Resignation and Demand for Reimbursement by the Employer<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

The employer asked the labor court to terminate the employment contract. The reason? The employee was allegedly not performing adequately due to his absences due to illness. In addition, the employer demanded reimbursement of the full salary and the car allowance during the period of illness, totaling nearly \u20ac260,000. <\/p>\n\n

The judge had to determine whether this was a legitimate request or whether it constituted inappropriate conduct on the part of the employer.<\/p>\n\n

The judge’s ruling: the employer acted in a seriously culpable manner<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

The subdistrict court judge dismissed the request. The judge found that the employer had deliberately thwarted the employee\u2019s reintegration by already hiring someone else and making the original position unavailable. This effectively prevented the employee from returning to his former position on fair terms, even though he was entitled to do so, especially given his many years of dedication and strong performance. <\/p>\n\n

Furthermore, it was unreasonable to claim that the employee was to blame for his absence due to illness, let alone that he should have to repay his salary. His absence due to long COVID was not his fault. <\/p>\n\n

A substantial compensation payment for the employee<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n

The court found that the employer had acted with gross negligence and awarded the employee fair compensation of \u20ac250,000. In addition, he received: <\/p>\n\n