Under pressure from The Hague Court, the healthcare provider in the South Netherlands, Sjalom Sorge, was forced to put an end to the summary dismissal of an employee who did not have the required healthcare certificate.
This is evident from the settlement between the parties and their confirmation of RTL Z.
Missing diploma
The woman began working as a care assistant at the healthcare institution in the fall of 2022, but six months later she clashed with her employer because she did not have the required diploma.
According to her employer, she lied about it; According to the woman, the health institution was aware that the certificate had not been obtained. In the end, Sjalom Zorg fired her on the spot.
The impeachment was withdrawn
In November, a Rotterdam District Court judge gave the green light for the dismissal, but the employee appealed the ruling. Before the Court of Appeal in The Hague, the healthcare organization's position was found to be much weaker, with the result that the employer was eventually forced to withdraw the dismissal.
Since the dismissal has been summarily terminated, Sjalom Sorge must also continue to pay the woman her back pay until her employment contract expires. This costs the healthcare organization more than four months' wages. This is clear from the official report on the agreements concluded by the Hague Court, which was seen by RTL Z.
Algebra
Employee lawyer Ewood van den Ouden sees the settlement as compensation for his client. “This is a strange turn of events. The employer simply would not agree to such a settlement, especially after the previous victory in sub-court.”
Director Kempe Back of Sjaloom Zorg acknowledges that the employer made mistakes during the dismissal case. “The employee did not have the diploma required for her position, but we should have discovered that earlier. To be honest, we made a mistake there. The judge also found summary dismissal to be too strict, because the employment contract was terminated after four years.” Months would have ended anyway.
Point won
Buck says the health care facility should only pay the back pay to the domestic worker, not the nurse. “We won the point, but overall it was a disappointing turnaround for us.”
Employment lawyer Pascal Besselink from DAS emphasizes that the settlement is not a legal ruling. “Strictly speaking, the court did not comment on the case, so we do not know what the judges would have ultimately ruled on appeal. But especially given the prior ruling by the sub-court judge, I can imagine the employee views the settlement as a victory.”
