A Limburg ruling shows how speed, sickness and exit pressure can turn a staffing problem into a costly HR dispute.
The scene is easy to imagine in a small Dutch business. The owner has lost patience. The roster is tight, colleagues are irritated, and one worker is seen as the obstacle to normal work. A meeting is called. The worker is told that the contract should end. Access is blocked. The worker leaves the building.
When the record carries the case
That is the moment where a staffing problem can become a sickness file, a wage file and a control problem. Dutch sickness records and employer control are not paperwork in the background. They can decide who pays, and for how long.
The ruling behind that scene is Rechtbank Limburg, 9 April 2026, ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2026:3309. A Dutch payroll law signal this week brought it back into view, but the judgment itself is the useful source. The kantonrechter treated the employer’s conduct as seriously culpable after an abrupt non-active placement, an offered settlement agreement, blocked system access and an escorted departure in front of colleagues.
That is not just a legal point. It is a management warning.
The day that changes the case
In the Limburg case, the worker had recently been ill. On 26 May 2025 the employer suddenly told him it wanted to end the employment contract. It offered a settlement agreement, released him from work, denied him access to company systems and had him escorted out. The employee reported sick on 29 May.
Months followed with reintegration, mediation and a worsening relationship. The employer later asked the court to dissolve the contract, arguing that the employee had acted seriously culpably. The court rejected that reading. It found the opposite: the employer’s own conduct on 26 May had broken the trust.
The contract was dissolved because the relationship had become untenable. The sickness dismissal ban did not stop dissolution in this case, because the court considered ending the employment relationship to be in the employee’s interest. The court set the transition payment at €5,755 gross and fair compensation at €50,000. It also gave the employer the chance to withdraw the dissolution request after that figure was known.
For a small employer, the lesson is sharp. A difficult worker does not automatically make a clean exit file. If the employer creates the break with pressure, poor timing and thin evidence, the cost can move quickly toward the business.
Illness does not pause the calendar
Dutch sickness rules have their own rhythm. Rijksoverheid explains the main rule plainly: during the first 104 weeks of sickness or incapacity for work, an employer generally cannot dismiss a worker because of sickness, subject to exceptions.
Payment pressure meets privacy
UWV adds the working calendar. Employer and employee make a plan of approach in week 8 of sickness. They discuss progress at least every six weeks and adjust the plan when needed. If they disagree about capacity, suitable work or reintegration efforts, either side can ask UWV for a deskundigenoordeel. That opinion is advice, not a binding court ruling, but it often clarifies a stuck file.
This matters because mediation and reintegration are not the same thing. Mediation may help repair a conflict. It does not replace the plan of approach. A settlement discussion may happen. It does not stop wage duties, medical-capacity questions or the need to record serious reintegration steps.
I read the Limburg judgment as a reminder that the calendar keeps running, even when the relationship feels broken. The sickness file does not wait for the employment conflict to become neat.
The cash cost of speed
Rechtspraak’s public explanation of non-active placement and suspension is sober but important. These measures sit in the employer’s risk sphere, are assessed through good employment practice and usually leave wage payment running. A cao or contract may add conditions.
That means non-active placement is not a harmless pause button. It is a formal risk decision. It needs a reason, a duration, a wage position and a review moment. It also needs a record of why a softer step was not enough.
The broader labour setting makes this more expensive. CBS counted 378,000 open vacancies at the end of the first quarter of 2026 and 91 vacancies per 100 unemployed people. That is cooler than the hottest labour market, but still tight. CBS also reported sickness absence of 5.8 percent in the first quarter of 2026, above the long-term average. In companies with fewer than ten employees, absence rose from 2.6 percent to 2.8 percent.
One absence can distort a small roster. One broken relationship can pull the owner, payroll adviser and team leader into weeks of meetings. Replacing the work may mean overtime, temporary labour or lost sales. If reintegration is later judged insufficient, UWV can impose a wage sanction of up to 52 extra weeks. During that extra wage period, dismissal is blocked.
The bill is rarely only the court award.
Control starts before the meeting
Return to that meeting on 26 May. The hard question is not whether the employer was frustrated. Many employers are. The hard question is whether the business had done the slower work first.
What employers should keep readable
Was there a clear performance record? Had the worker been told what had to improve? Was there a fair chance to improve? If the real issue was expected shrinkage or fewer shifts, was that treated as an economic staffing issue rather than dressed up as personal blame? In the Limburg judgment, the court noted material pointing to expected shrinkage and fewer shift-leader roles as a possible background to the attempted exit.
This is where governance becomes very practical. A founder does not need a thick corporate HR department to act with control. The business needs separate tracks. Performance belongs in one track. Sickness and reintegration belong in another. Mediation has its own purpose. Exit talks need care, especially when the worker is ill or close to a sickness context.
Mix those tracks, and the record starts to tell a different story. It no longer says that the employer managed a staffing problem. It may say that the employer applied pressure and then tried to make the worker carry the blame.
The calmer decision
Rijksoverheid has also announced 2026 policy proposals that point in the same direction: more weight for the company doctor’s advice in UWV’s reintegration assessment after two years of sickness, and a possible shift of second-year reintegration mainly toward another employer. These are policy tracks, not settled daily law for every current case. Still, they show where the pressure is moving: capacity, medical advice, timing and evidence.
For a small employer, the useful response is not fear. It is discipline before emotion. When a worker is sent home, the business should be able to explain why that step was necessary. It should also know why wages continue or do not, what alternatives were weighed, how privacy was protected and when the decision will be reviewed. When sickness appears, the week-8 plan and six-week updates should not be allowed to drift.
The most expensive HR decision is often the one made to feel immediate relief. The calmer decision may feel slower on the day, but it preserves choices. It protects the worker’s dignity, the employer’s credibility and the cash position of the business.
In a small company, control is not coldness. It is the habit of not letting one bad meeting write the whole case.
Sources
- Werkgever zet werknemer ineens op non-actief en wil einde contract: ernstig verwijtbaar handelen · Salaris Vanmorgen
- Rechtspraak – Court signal: abrupt non-active and VSO around sickness
- Rechtspraak – What non-active/suspension means for employers
- Rijksoverheid – Sickness dismissal ban and exceptions
- UWV – Plan van aanpak deadline (week 8)
- UWV – Plan van aanpak maintenance and adjustments
- UWV – Deskundigenoordeel when reintegration stalls
- UWV – RIV-toets and the wage sanction (loonsanctie)
Referenced in the article
Column | Human Resources
The Proposed WIA Penalty Pause Puts Income Bridges on Employers’ Desks
UWV backlogs shift the sickness conversation from pressure on the state to planning at work.
The Polder is written for readers who need the Dutch business environment translated into practical meaning. Corrections, source policy and editorial accountability are part of the publication record.
