Introduction
An employee who grabs food from a trolley is summarily dismissed because of a zero-tolerance policy. But can an employer rely on this if the policy is not actively enforced? This blog discusses why the judge found the dismissal in this case to be unjustified.
The situation: eating from a trolley and summary dismissal
An employee grabs some food from a trolley of leftover food from customers. The employer decides to respond sternly and summarily dismisses the employee. The employer argues that there is a zero-tolerance policy: eating products, even if they would otherwise be thrown away, is absolutely forbidden.
The employee disputes the dismissal, arguing that, on the contrary, it was quite common within the company for staff to eat from leftover food. According to him, there was no clear agreement at all that this was prohibited, or at least no agreement that was still being actively observed.
What does the judge say?
The subdistrict court found for the employee. Although eating products that are meant to be thrown away can indeed constitute an urgent reason for dismissal, this only applies if there is a truly clear and active zero-tolerance policy.
In this case, the employer had last brought the policy to the attention of staff in 2016. The judge felt that was too long ago. An employer seeking to enforce a strict policy should be expected to regularly repeat and clearly communicate that policy and the consequences of violation. Only an occasional past dismissal of other employees for the same behavior was insufficient to keep the policy alive.
Because the zero-tolerance policy had not been brought to sufficient current attention, the summary dismissal was not legally valid.
Importance for employers
This ruling makes it clear that simply having policies in place is not enough. Employers must actively ensure that rules, especially around a strict policy such as zero tolerance, are regularly brought to their attention. Failure to do so may mean that even a rule that is strict on paper may be insufficient in practice to justify summary dismissal.
Clear, regular communication of rules is thus essential to take firm action as an employer in the event of transgressive behavior.
Conclusion
A zero-tolerance policy can justify summary dismissal, but only if the policy is current and clearly communicated. Without regular repetition and compliance, an employer cannot simply invoke old rules. Active communication about rules of conduct remains essential.
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
