No second disciplinary action based on same facts
The Court ruled that the employee’s behaviour could indeed be seen as a culpable act. Nevertheless the Court rejected the termination request because the employee had already been disciplined by the suspension without pay. On the basis of the CLA the employer could also have chosen to dismiss the employee, whether or not combined with a suspension with continued payment. The employer had not done so. A dismissal followed on the suspension without pay would come down to a second disciplinary action based on the same facts. According to the Court, this would be in conflict with the way of sanctioning under Dutch labor law and the intention of the collective labor agreement.
The Court nullified the employee’s suspension and approved the employee´s request to be reinstated.
Supervisory Board not allowed to take disciplinary action against employees
The Court ruled that the formal warning of the Supervisory Board should be ignored since there is no employment relationship between the employee and the Supervisory Board. According to the Court there might be a role for the Supervisory Board in case of disputes between an employee and his employer. However, the Supervisory Board is not allowed to discipline the employee or even to threaten to do so.
Be careful while disciplining employees
A harsh outcome for the employer, even the more so since the Court was of the opinion that the employee’s behaviour should be seen as a culpable act.
Employers, be careful while disciplining employees: be critical, follow the rules accurately and decide on the right course to follow.