The District Court Zeeland-West-Brabant recently ruled on suspending an employee due to redundancy. The court’s reasoning sets out clearly what is and isn’t allowed when suspending an employee during a UWV dismissal procedure.
Facts
On 10 July 2023, during a weekly online meeting with her manager, the employee was unexpectedly told that her role would be made redundant. The same day, she received an email stating there were also no redeployment options due to organisational change, and that there was no alternative to ending her employment contract. She was suspended with effect from the date her role was made redundant. On 26 July 2023, the employer filed a dismissal application with the UWV on economic grounds.
The employee argued that she had wrongly been relieved of her duties, since there was no compelling ground for it. In her view, the suspension and the measures taken were unacceptable and damaging, and she should immediately be allowed to resume her normal duties. The employer argued that, pending the UWV’s decision, the employee was relieved of her duties with continued pay, since her role no longer existed and it was therefore no longer possible for her to perform it.
Ruling
Since this was a summary injunction case, the employee needed to show an urgent interest. The subdistrict court found this urgent interest present, since the UWV’s decision could still take a long time. The claim for reinstatement covered not only the period until the UWV’s decision, but also the period thereafter, up to the lawful end of the employment.
The employee could not be required to accept being relieved of her duties for this entire period without reasonable grounds. The economic grounds for redundancy had also not been established, so in principle she had to resume her duties. Suspending an employee is a far-reaching measure. It is only valid where circumstances are so compelling that the employer cannot reasonably be required to continue allowing the employee to perform the agreed work.
The subdistrict court ruled that the employer had failed to sufficiently show a valid reason for suspending the employee. The fact that her role had been made redundant and her duties taken over by colleagues was the employer’s own responsibility. The employer had suspended her without good reason and had given insufficient weight to her interests. The argument that her return was undesirable because the employer no longer considered her a reliable employee was found insufficiently substantiated, and there was no evidence of a special or unworkable situation. The claim for reinstatement was granted. The employee was to regain full access to her digital work environment, including her email account and data.
Tip
Sometimes suspending an employee is genuinely necessary. Whether such a measure is valid depends on the terms of the employment contract and the relevant circumstances. It is essential that the employer has a compelling ground for the suspension, which must be carefully justified and substantiated. Redundancy arising from a reorganisation is not enough on its own. Aggression, intimidation, or a fraud investigation into the employee generally are.
For the full ruling, click here (in Dutch).
Do you have questions arising from this ruling about suspending one of your employees? Please feel free to contact one of our lawyers, without obligation – we are happy to think along with you. Call: +31 (0)10-2492444
