Employment lawyer for dismissal in the Netherlands: what you need to know

An employment lawyer in the Netherlands advises employers and employees on dismissal: whether a statutory ground exists, which route the law prescribes, what the file must contain, what a settlement agreement should say, and which deadlines apply. The point of that advice is that Dutch dismissal law requires two things at once. An employer needs a valid ground listed in article 7:669 of the Dutch Civil Code, and prior permission from the UWV or a decision of the subdistrict court, unless the employee agrees to end the contract. Miss either one and the dismissal fails, whatever the merits of the underlying situation.

Why dismissal here needs advice, and when to get it

The Dutch system is procedural in a way that surprises anyone used to at-will employment or to a straightforward notice-and-payment model. A justified reason is not enough. The reason must fit one of the grounds the legislature has listed, that ground must be complete in itself, and the request must be brought before the body that has jurisdiction over it. An employer with an unanswerable case who goes to the wrong body loses; an employee with a weak case whose employer skipped a step can win.

That is why the timing of legal advice matters more than most people expect. The moments at which it makes a real difference are early ones.

For an employer, the useful moment is when a problem is identified, not when the decision to dismiss has already been taken. Nearly every failed dismissal for underperformance fails because the file was built after the decision rather than before it. Advice at the point where the first conversation is being planned shapes what is recorded, how the improvement process is set up and whether the eventual application stands a chance.

For an employee, the useful moments are the day a settlement agreement is put on the table, the day a dismissal is announced, and the day something happens that could later be characterised as culpable conduct. An employee who signs first and asks afterwards has usually given away the position, because a statutory reflection period is short and the deadlines that follow are shorter.

Both sides should also take advice before an existing arrangement is ended in some other way, for instance where a person engaged as a contractor is told their assignment is finishing. Whether that relationship is in fact an employment contract is a question with consequences for the entire termination, and it is dealt with in our article on when a contractor becomes an employee.

The grounds for dismissal

Article 7:669 of the Civil Code contains a closed list, lettered a to i. An employer must satisfy the requirements of one of them completely, and must also show that redeployment within the organisation, if necessary with training, is not possible within a reasonable period.

• a. Redundancy. The position disappears for economic, technological or organisational reasons, including the closure of a business or part of it. The employer must show the necessity of the measure and must apply the statutory selection rules correctly.
• b. Long-term incapacity. The employee has been unable to work for more than two years and recovery to the point of resuming the work, or adapted work, is not expected within twenty-six weeks. Reintegration obligations must have been fulfilled.
• c. Frequent absence. Repeated short-term absence with unacceptable consequences for the business. This ground is rarely successful, because the conditions attached to it are demanding.
• d. Unsuitability. The employee is not suited to the work, other than through illness, and was told so in good time, given a genuine opportunity to improve, and supported in doing so.
• e. Culpable conduct. Conduct that makes it unreasonable to expect the employer to continue the employment, such as theft, fraud or persistent refusal to follow reasonable instructions.
• f. Conscientious objection. Refusal to perform the work because of a serious conscientious objection, where adapted work is not possible.
• g. Disturbed working relationship. The relationship is so seriously and permanently damaged that continuation cannot reasonably be required. The court will look at what the employer did to repair it.
• h. Other circumstances. A residual ground for situations that do not fit the others, such as detention or the loss of a required permit. It is not a fallback for a case that fails on another ground.
• i. Combination of grounds. Where circumstances from two or more of the grounds c to h together make continuation unreasonable, the court may dissolve the contract on the combined ground, and may then award additional compensation on top of the transition payment. The grounds for redundancy, long-term incapacity and conscientious objection cannot be used in the combination.

The practical significance of the list is that a case has to be built around one ground and proved on that ground. A file mixing complaints about performance with irritation about attitude and a suggestion of reorganisation is a file that may fail on each of them separately. The combination ground softens that, but it is not a rescue for a case that was never documented.

The file: what actually decides the case

The single most common reason a dismissal fails is an incomplete file. Dutch courts do not take assertions on trust, and the burden rests on the employer.

For unsuitability, the file has to show a sequence rather than a conclusion: what was expected, how and when the employee was told that performance fell short, what improvement process was agreed, over what period, with what support and training, and what happened during it. Meeting notes confirmed in writing at the time carry weight; a memorandum written months later, after the decision was taken, carries almost none. If the employee disputed the assessment, that has to be in the file too, along with the response.

For culpable conduct, the file needs the facts, the investigation and the proportionality: what happened, how it was established, whether the employee was heard, what the applicable rules said, whether they were known and enforced consistently, and what sanction was imposed in comparable cases. For a disturbed working relationship, the court will ask what was tried before the conclusion was reached that repair was impossible, and mediation is often the first question.

An employment lawyer earns their place at this stage rather than at the hearing. Reviewing a file before an improvement process starts, or before a suspension is imposed, changes the outcome; reviewing it after the application has been rejected does not. Employers who want the practical version of this can read our guide on how to handle employee dismissal legally.

Employees should approach the same file from the other side. Ask for it, in writing, and check whether the process described actually took place: whether the improvement plan was realistic, whether the support promised was delivered, whether the goals were measurable and achievable, and whether the employer created the conditions in which improvement was possible. Those are the questions that decide a case about performance, and they are also the questions that determine the value of a settlement.

Which route applies: UWV or the subdistrict court

The route is not a matter of preference. Jurisdiction is divided by ground.

The UWV handles dismissals on the ground of redundancy and on the ground of long-term incapacity. It is a written procedure: the employer submits the application with supporting documents, the employee is given the opportunity to respond in writing, and the UWV decides whether to grant permission. Permission does not end the contract; it allows the employer to give notice, observing the applicable notice period, from which the time taken by the procedure may in part be deducted, provided that at least one month of notice remains. If the UWV refuses, the employer can still ask the court to dissolve the contract on the same ground.

The subdistrict court handles all the other grounds, on an application to dissolve the contract. It is an oral procedure with a hearing, and the court either dissolves the contract, fixing the date and deciding on compensation, or rejects the application, in which case the employment continues. There is a right of appeal, which is a real consideration for both parties because it can leave the position unresolved for a long time.

Several situations fall outside both routes altogether. During a valid probationary period the contract can be ended immediately. A fixed-term contract without an interim notice clause simply expires. Summary dismissal for an urgent cause, ontslag op staande voet, requires no prior permission but must be given without delay, with the reason communicated immediately, and it is the most frequently overturned form of dismissal there is: if it does not hold, the employer is usually confronted with continued wage liability or substantial compensation. Termination on reaching the pensionable age agreed or provided for is permitted subject to conditions, and in insolvency the trustee has a separate power to give notice.

Prohibitions on termination

Even where a ground exists and the correct route is followed, the law blocks termination in defined situations. The best known is illness: an employer may not give notice during the first two years of incapacity for work, which is why the sequence of a sick note and a dismissal application is examined closely. Notice is also prohibited during pregnancy and maternity leave and for a period afterwards, and there are prohibitions connected to membership of the works council, to trade union activity, to military service and to certain forms of leave.

Alongside these, the law prohibits termination because of particular circumstances, such as the transfer of an undertaking, the refusal to work on Sundays, or the fact that an employee has invoked a statutory right. A prohibition of the first kind depends on timing; one of the second kind depends on the reason, and the burden of showing that the reason was different falls in practice on the employer.

A prohibition does not always mean a dismissal is impossible. The court can still dissolve a contract where the request is unconnected to the circumstance covered by the prohibition, or where the interests of the employee no longer require the protection, for instance in a full closure of the business. But it changes the route and the risk profile entirely, and it is the first thing to check before anything is put in writing.

Summary dismissal

Summary dismissal for an urgent cause is the exception to the whole system: no permission, no notice, immediate effect. Precisely because the consequences for the employee are so severe, the conditions are strict. There must be an urgent cause, judged on all the circumstances including the personal position of the employee and the consequences of the dismissal. It must be given without delay once the facts are sufficiently clear, which in practice means acting within days while carrying out any investigation promptly. And the reason must be communicated to the employee immediately, in terms that cannot later be extended or replaced.

Getting one of those wrong is usually fatal. An employer that investigates for weeks before acting loses the immediacy; an employer that gives a broad reason and specifies it later is held to the original wording. An employee confronted with a summary dismissal should not simply accept it, and should not resign in response either, because resigning can affect entitlement to unemployment benefit. The two-month period for challenging it runs from the date of the dismissal and is absolute.

Timing and what it costs in delay

A UWV procedure runs on fixed steps and normally takes a number of weeks, longer where the employee defends and a second round of written submissions is ordered. A court procedure is scheduled for a hearing and then decided, so the total time depends on the court list. Neither is instantaneous, and both require the file to be complete when the application is submitted: material introduced late has less effect than the same material produced at the start.

For the employee the timetable matters for a different reason. Wages continue during the procedure, and prohibitions on termination, such as during illness, can block the route entirely, which is why the sequence of events in the weeks before an application is often decisive.

The settlement agreement and what a lawyer checks in it

Most Dutch employment relationships that end at the initiative of the employer end by agreement rather than by procedure, in a vaststellingsovereenkomst (settlement agreement). It is faster and it gives both sides control over the outcome, but the terms are negotiated in the shadow of what the UWV or the court would do, so the strength of the underlying dismissal case is what determines a reasonable deal.

The clauses that matter are these.

• The end date and the notice period. The agreement should observe the notice period that would have applied, because ending earlier can affect the start of unemployment benefit.
• Who takes the initiative and why. The agreement must record that the employer initiated the termination and that no urgent cause or culpable conduct on the part of the employee is involved. Wording that suggests otherwise can cost the employee the unemployment benefit entirely.
• The financial package. The transition payment as a minimum reference point, plus whatever has been negotiated on top of it, with the payment date and the method of payment specified.
• The final settlement of accruals. Outstanding salary, holiday allowance and untaken statutory holidays, bonus entitlements, and the treatment of pension.
• Restrictive covenants. Whether the non-competition and relationship clauses are released, wholly or in part. This is frequently more valuable to an employee than an extra month of severance and is frequently forgotten.
• References, communication and confidentiality. What will be said internally and externally, and whether a written reference is agreed.
• Company property and access. Return of equipment, data and access rights, and what happens to material the employee is entitled to keep.
• Final discharge. The clause under which the parties give up further claims. Its scope should be checked rather than assumed, particularly where a bonus, an incident or an accrued right is still outstanding.

Two statutory points sit around the agreement. An employee has a reflection period of fourteen days after the agreement is concluded, within which it can be dissolved in writing without giving reasons; if the agreement does not mention that right, the period is three weeks. And an employee may not validly waive the transition payment in advance, although it can be settled as part of an agreed package.

It is normal practice in the Netherlands for the employer to contribute to the cost of the legal review of a settlement agreement, and it is normal for both parties to be advised. That is not a courtesy; it reduces the risk that the agreement is later challenged. Our article on the transition compensation on ending an employment contract sets out the entitlement that anchors the negotiation.

Unemployment benefit and why the wording matters

An employee who loses a job in the Netherlands may be entitled to unemployment benefit, and the conditions for it are administered by the UWV independently of anything the parties agree between themselves. Two of those conditions shape the drafting of every settlement agreement.

The first is that the employee must not be culpably unemployed. An employee who resigns, or who agrees to a termination that is presented as being at their own initiative, or who is dismissed for conduct attributable to them, risks refusal of the benefit. That is why a settlement agreement should state that the employer took the initiative and that no urgent cause or culpable conduct is involved, and why an employee should never sign a document that says otherwise in order to keep the peace.

The second is the notice period. If the employment is ended earlier than the date on which it would have ended had proper notice been given, the benefit does not start until that date, leaving the employee without income in the intervening period unless the settlement compensates for it. Checking that calculation is a routine part of reviewing an agreement and a routine source of avoidable loss where it is skipped. The UWV assesses these questions itself, on the documents, so what the agreement says is what counts.

Money: what is owed on termination

The transition payment is the statutory severance entitlement. It is due whenever the employment ends at the initiative of the employer, including where a fixed-term contract is simply not renewed, and it accrues from the first day of the employment, so it is due even where the contract ends during the probationary period. It amounts to one third of the gross monthly salary for each full year of service, with the remainder calculated pro rata, and the relevant salary includes fixed components such as holiday allowance. There is a statutory maximum, which is adjusted annually and published by the government, so the applicable figure should be taken from the current official source rather than from an older article.

There are exceptions. No transition payment is due where the employee is seriously culpable for the termination, where the employee terminates without the employer being seriously culpable, or where the employee has not reached the age at which the rules apply. In insolvency there is no entitlement, and the wage guarantee scheme operated by the UWV does not cover it, which is a point employees frequently discover too late.

Fair compensation, the billijke vergoeding, is something different. It is not a formula and it is not a right; it is awarded by a court where the employer is seriously culpable, for instance where the ground for dismissal was fabricated, where the employee was pushed out through discrimination or harassment, or where reintegration obligations were grossly neglected. The amount is determined by the court on the circumstances, including the loss suffered, and it can substantially exceed the transition payment.

Alongside those, the final settlement must deal with outstanding salary, accrued holiday allowance, untaken statutory holidays and any contractual entitlements. These are earned rights rather than negotiable items, and overlooking them is a common source of claims after the relationship has otherwise ended.

Deadlines: the rule that catches most people

Dutch employment law works with short limitation periods that expire absolutely. They are the reason advice a month after the event is often advice about something that can no longer be repaired.

An employee who wants to challenge a termination, for instance by asking the court to annul a summary dismissal or to award fair compensation, must lodge the request within two months of the day on which the employment ended. A claim for the transition payment must be brought within three months of that day. A claim for the compensation due where an employer failed to give the statutory notification at the end of a fixed-term contract must be brought within three months of the day on which that obligation arose.

These are not periods that a court can extend for good reasons. If the request is lodged late it is inadmissible, however strong the case. For an employee that means the decision to accept or contest a dismissal has to be taken quickly, and it is a decision that should be taken with sight of the file rather than in the emotion of the first week. For an employer it means the position becomes final relatively quickly, which is itself a reason to run the process properly: an irregular dismissal that is challenged in time is expensive, and the exposure is not limited to the transition payment.

Employment status: the question behind many terminations

A growing share of the disputes we see begin with a disagreement about whether there was an employment contract at all. A person engaged as a self-employed contractor whose assignment is ended has no dismissal protection, no notice period and no transition payment. If the relationship was in reality an employment contract, all of those apply, and the termination was almost certainly irregular.

The test does not turn on the label. The court weighs all the circumstances of the working relationship: the nature and duration of the work, how the work and working hours are determined, whether the person is embedded in the organisation, whether the work must be performed personally, how the remuneration is determined and paid, and whether the person bears commercial risk and behaves as an entrepreneur towards other clients. The intention of the parties as to what to call the arrangement plays no part in that assessment.

The context has changed in the past two years. The enforcement moratorium applied by the tax authorities ended on 1 January 2025 and enforcement against false self-employment has resumed. A legal presumption of employment based on an hourly rate below a set level has been adopted and published in the Staatsblad, but it enters into force by royal decree and is not yet in effect, and the part of the original proposal that would have codified the qualification test did not survive. Employers reviewing their workforce should therefore assess the reality of each relationship rather than wait for a new statutory test.

Contract form is also being steered financially. Employers pay a lower unemployment insurance contribution for employees on a written contract of indefinite duration than for flexible contracts, and the higher rate is set five percentage points above the lower one. The rates themselves are fixed annually, so the current figures should be taken from the published tables, but the structure of the incentive is stable and deliberate.

What an employment lawyer actually does

It is worth being concrete about the work, because the value of advice in this field lies in a small number of specific tasks.

The first is an assessment of position. Given the file as it stands, which ground is available, does it hold, which route applies, what is the realistic outcome and what is it worth? That assessment is what turns a dispute into a negotiation with a defined range, and it is as useful to an employee deciding whether to accept an offer as to an employer deciding whether to make one.

The second is the file itself: what has to be recorded, in what form and by when, before a process starts. The third is drafting and reviewing documents, from the improvement plan and the notification letter to the settlement agreement and the release of restrictive covenants. The fourth is negotiation, which in practice determines the outcome in most cases. The fifth is conducting the procedure before the UWV or the subdistrict court, and advising on whether an appeal is worth the delay it causes.

Running alongside all of these is the question of deadlines, because a case can be lost on a date rather than on the merits. A lawyer will fix the relevant dates at the outset and work back from them.

The wider framework in which all this sits, from contract types to working conditions, is set out in our guide to Dutch employment law, and the way we work on these matters is described on our page for employment lawyers in the Netherlands.

Getting advice

If you are an employer, take advice before the process starts: before the first formal conversation about performance, before a suspension, before an application is drafted, and before a settlement is offered. If you are an employee, take advice before you sign anything and within days rather than weeks of a dismissal, because the periods within which a termination can be challenged are measured in weeks.

Law & More acts for both employers and employees in dismissal matters, from assessing the position and building or testing the file to negotiating settlement agreements and conducting proceedings before the UWV and the subdistrict court. Our employment lawyers are happy to review your situation and tell you plainly where you stand.

Frequently asked questions about Dutch dismissal law

These are the questions employers and employees ask most often about dismissal in the Netherlands.