Limburg District Court, 11 April 2025, ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2025:3427
In these summary proceedings, an employee claimed continued payment of her wages after her employer had stopped them. The subdistrict court rejected the claim. Under the given circumstances, the employer was entitled to stop wages, since the employee showed insufficient willingness to take part in mediation.
Facts
The employee had worked for the employer since 15 May 2006, for 39 hours a week. On 25 January 2023, she became unfit for work. From February 2024, she began reintegration, and by September 2024 her working hours had built up to 32 hours a week. In October, the company doctor advised formulating concrete next steps towards a full return to work, if desired with the guidance of an independent third party. Following this, the employer proposed mediation on several occasions. On 25 November 2024, a mediator contacted the employee, who asked for a week to consider. Four days later, the employer announced it would stop wages if the employee did not unconditionally agree to take part in mediation by 24 December 2024 at the latest.
On 2 December 2024, the company doctor declared the employee fully unfit for work, but able to hold conversations with the employer. On 17 December 2024, continued payment of wages was stopped with immediate effect. Shortly afterwards, the UWV imposed a wage sanction on the employer for insufficient reintegration efforts, ruling that mediation should have been actively pursued.
Ruling of the court
The key question is whether the employer could reasonably require cooperation with mediation.
Although mediation is voluntary, the employer, given the stalled communication and the company doctor’s advice, could expect the employee to be willing to explore whether mediation could offer a solution. Since she did not show that willingness, the employer was entitled to stop wages. The employee had rejected mediation outright. Conditions could have been discussed during an intake, if necessary assisted by her representative or a confidential adviser. The documents show her objection mainly stemmed from concerns about confidentiality towards her family and treating clinician. Nevertheless, she could be expected to remain open to exploring mediation as a constructive solution.
Conclusion
The court confirmed that the employer was entitled to stop wages due to the employee’s lack of cooperation with mediation. The claims in the summary proceedings were therefore rejected. Do you have questions about suspending wages or reintegration obligations? Our employment lawyers are happy to advise you.
Click here for this ruling (in Dutch).
