‘Doing a half-hearted job’ conflict between employees costs employer €94,000

Employers, take note: lingering workplace conflicts between employees can become costly if you fail to take sufficient action. This was confirmed in a recent judgment by the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, where a passive employer was ordered to pay substantial fair compensation.

Background

The employee in question joined the employer in 1996 and most recently held a managerial position. For some time, the employee and one of his colleagues—also in a managerial role—disagreed over the use of certain software in the workplace.

The difficult collaboration between the two was discussed for years during progress and performance reviews with their manager. After the employee repeatedly raised concerns with his manager but received no support, the conflict escalated further in August 2021. In a meeting with both employees and their manager, the employee stated that he had lost trust in his colleague and that the situation had become unworkable.

Shortly after, the employee also informed the employer's HR advisor about the conflict. He explained that his colleague had been criticizing, insulting, and belittling him for years, and he experienced this behavior as unacceptable. The employee further indicated that he was sleeping poorly, felt stressed, and no longer felt safe—yet the HR advisor also failed to (sufficiently) intervene.

As no solution to the conflict was provided, the employee reported sick in October 2021 due to psychological complaints. In his report, he cited the conflict with both his colleague and his manager as the cause.

On the advice of the company doctor, mediation between the employee and his manager took place a year later, but this did not resolve the conflict.

District Court Proceedings

Eventually, the employer filed a request with the district court to dissolve the employment contract due to a disrupted employment relationship. During the hearing, the employee agreed to the termination but requested—among other things—fair compensation due to serious misconduct by the employer.

In the contested ruling, the district court dissolved the employment contract on the grounds of a disrupted working relationship. It awarded a transitional compensation of €72,200.62 gross and a fair compensation equivalent to one year’s salary including holiday pay and other benefits, totaling €94,000 gross.

Judgment by the Court of Appeal

Both parties appealed the decision. The central question was whether the termination was due to serious misconduct or negligence by the employer. Additionally, it had to be assessed whether the amount of fair compensation should be higher or lower than what the district court had decided.

The Court of Appeal concluded that the termination was indeed the result of seriously culpable conduct by the employer. According to the court, the evidence showed that a long-standing, smoldering conflict existed between the employee and his colleague. Due to the organizational structure within the division, this issue was allowed to fester. During numerous meetings with his manager, the employee repeatedly raised the poor communication and strained working relationship with his colleague. The manager promised several times to take action. However, despite repeated requests and promises, the manager failed to act or contribute to a lasting solution.

The court deliberately did not address the question of who was primarily to blame for the conflict, as it found this irrelevant to the case. What mattered was that there was a serious conflict situation, and the employer—in the person of the manager—had a responsibility to intervene. Instead, the employer took no meaningful steps and offered only empty promises. This amounted to what in Dutch is called "pappen en nathouden"—a band-aid approach.

Regarding the amount of fair compensation, the Court of Appeal agreed with the district court that an award of one year’s salary including benefits (€94,000 gross) was fair in this situation.

Lessons for Employers

The court’s decision makes it painfully clear that employers are not only accountable for their actions, but also for their inaction.

The lesson is clear: employers must not ignore employee conflicts but address them promptly, thoroughly, and proactively. Avoiding a “band-aid” approach can help prevent legal claims and foster a healthier work environment.

You can read the full ruling via the following link:
https://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2024:2881