New EU Privacy Law
Many online users have likely noticed an influx of emails, from some companies, highlighting new privacy policies and user agreements online in cooperation with new EU laws.The new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will be the most significant data protection overhaul in two decades starting from 25th May, replacing the out-dated and much criticised 1995 EU Data Protection Directive (DPD); it seeks to address the growing challenges of globalisation and international data flow, as well as improving user control over their own personal data online. The new laws will strictly apply to all companies operating in the EU, no matter where they are based.
Why Change the Law?
The 1995 Data Protection Directive was first introduced for the enforcement of privacy as a fundamental human right, giving people protection over their personal data. With the dawn of IT and computer systems as early as the 1970s, the EU proposed measures to regulate the online flow of data and have continued to adapt their legislation to accommodate further evolving technology. However, in light of the recent Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal, and other similar situations, questions have been raised regarding the effectiveness of the current law to protect consumer...
The protection of confidential information and company secrets has formed an integral part of working culture in the Netherlands, with increasing number of employment contracts including some form of confidentiality clause. Under these contracts, employees are legally unauthorised from sharing company information, even some time after the termination of their employment. The first obvious penalty for violating one of these contracts is the immediate termination of one’s employment, for the breach of confidentiality as well as one’s employment contract.
What some employees fail to realise is that a non-disclosure agreement is a legally binding contract, and thus any breach is subject to legal action. A typical confidentiality clause specifies a penalty fine that should be paid to the company in such a case. This can even be the case after the termination of one’s employment if specified in the agreement. For example, some workers such as car engineers, can be prohibited from working with rival companies for a specified time period after the end of their employment to prevent sharing trade secrets with competitors. This may seem harsh, but it is a small price to pay compared to other legal actions some may face.
Unlike other countries, employers cannot sue...
In the world of competitive business, preventing trade secrets and employees from falling into the wrong hands is necessary for a company’s success. Under Dutch law, non-competition clauses provide a contractual obligation to prevent employees from finding employment with a competitor after the termination of their employment, with the main purpose of protecting an employer’s business interests through the protection of valuable company information and the remaining employees. Under normal circumstances, this type of agreement is not permanent and typically lasts for a year, and failure to comply can mean enforcing the clause in a court case, which can allow an employer to claim damages in some cases.
Contracts containing confidentiality and non-competition clauses are becoming increasingly common in the Netherlands for employees signing up to new jobs, especially within more technical fields such as engineering and technology, in order to prevent technical knowledge from being leaked outside the company. It is also prominent in marketing sectors to prevent leaking customer and supplier information. Depending on an industry or market, an employer can determine what to include in their employee’s non-compete clause including:
• A list of competitors a former employee is not allowed to work for.
• Restrictions on...
Letting go of an employee can be one of the hardest things any employer can do, but if the reasons are justifiable, then it is a perfectly legal and acceptable course of action to take. With that in mind, terminating an employee is not a decision to be taken lightly when running a business; making a calculated judgment means taking into account the numerous potential costs that come with letting an employee go, as well as the potential legal ramifications. Businesses today often fear the possibility of a lawsuit when letting a worker go, and they can incur extra costs if the matter is brought to court.
As with any important business decision, firing an employee first requires a good reason. This could be due to poor performance, misconduct or the lack of demand for the position an employee holds, whereby it becomes disadvantageous for a company to keep him or her. However, it is important to stay within legal boundaries, so firing an employee based on personal reasons or discrimination is always unacceptable. Firing employees on the spot for misconduct is also a legally risky move; it is always better to investigate an incident, gather evidence and ask the...
As of July 1, 2017, a number of legislative changes will enter into force that are of importance to HR professionals. The Arbowet changes. And the bill that changes the minimum wage and minimum holiday allowance will come into effect in part. An overview of the amendments to legislation as of July 1, 2017.
From 1 July 2017, an employee may request a second opinion from another company doctor. In addition, employees are given the legal right to speak to the company doctor during an 'open consultation hour'. Also, the prevention worker gets a firmer position and the works council gets more control over working conditions policy. Employers must enter into a (new) basic agreement with the labor service provider. This can be done by completing the current contract and by concluding a new contract. Although there is a transitional contract for running contracts, it is wise to discuss the contract with the labor service provider in the short term. Please note that the OR has the right to vote on the basic contract with the labor service provider.
In the new Arbowet, the SZW Inspectorate gets a bigger role. If an employer has not concluded a contract with...
In the 1980s the Dutch government introduced legislation that led to a pivotal reformulation of the economy and the labour market in the Netherlands. This became known as the “Dutch Model”, and attracted attention from economists and policy makers globally. It inspired the likes of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the German Chancellor Gerard Schröder in their own reformulation of labour market policies in their respective countries. The Wassenaar Agreement of 1982 forms the core of the Dutch model. The main terms of the agreement included wage increases (with an eye to overall productivity growth), a growth in the number of part-time jobs for job redistribution purposes, and more labour market flexibility. These various changes resulted in the success of the model, leading to an increase...
Immediate or Instant Dismissal
The position taken by the courts on this...
Maximum duration of unemployment shortened
The maximum duration of entitlement to unemployment benefit is determined by the accumulated work history. Under the WWZ, the maximum duration of unemployment as of January 1, 2016 will gradually reduce from 38 to 24 months. During the first ten years of the current structure, the distribution will be maintained. This translates to one month of unemployment benefits per year of employment history. For subsequent years, every year under employment will lead to longer duration of unemployment benefits by a half month. The employment that employees have accrued before 2016 is respected. If the length of employment on January 1, 2016 is more than 24 years, there is a possibility of a gradual reduction in the unemployment duration until the new maximum of 24 months. All this applies to new benefits that arose on or after 1 January 2016. People who face unemployment before January 1, 2016 are not affected by the reduction until they resume work.
Maximum transition fee increases
Article 7: 673 paragraph 3 of the Civil Code lays...
Linda is a professional with whom you’ll have the right click from the start. She is conscientious about delivering based on your expectations. With her guidance you’ll be able to look at yourself from a bird’s eye view and discover with precision what is most valuable from your past experience for your future career.
I would like to thank you for your great job to make my CV presentable and truly reflecting my knowledge and experience.
With your highly professional advices and support I felt more confident and eventually I got a job.