Save the date

The coronavirus is seriously impacting both employers and employees. We look forward to informing you about the current employment-law consequences during our annual employment-law seminar. This year, partly due to COVID-19, the seminar will take place online, on 12 November from 2 till 4 p.m.

NOW 3: the outlines

Although the new Tijdelijke Noodmaatregel Overbrugging voor Werkbehoud (Temporary Emergency Bridging Measure for Sustained Employment) (NOW 3.0) has yet to be published, the outlines have already been made known. The objective will still be to support work and income. NOW 3 will enter into force on 1 October for a period of nine months and will be cut back slightly every three months.

For more information or advice on this subject, please contact Bart de Vroe or Anna Görgün.

The (i) ground: the “i” of illusory?

The (i) ground has been added to the new Wet arbeidsmarkt in balans (Balanced Labour Market Act) as a possible ground for termination. It is intended to make it easier for courts to issue customised rulings. Employers hoped for – and unions feared – a relaxation of dismissal law, but neither has come true. The (i) ground has proven to be of limited use and has so far given rise to only three terminations.

For more information or advice on this subject, please contact Michiel van Haelst .

Demanding access to documents:

the lesson learned from Essilux/GrandVision

The acquisition of eyeglass chain GrandVision, the parent company of Pearle and Eye Wish, has been reported multiple times in the press, but the deal has not been closed. Essilux recently asked the court access to documents of Grandvision, which Grandvision has repeatedly denied. Now the court has denied Essilux’ request. The reason for this is known as a “fishing expedition”: in the court’s opinion, access had wrongly been demanded to documents that the other party rightly wished to withhold.

For more information or advice on this subject, please contact Pieter Verloop or Sara Karem.

Privacy update

Groundbreaking Court of Appeal judgment: Privacy Shield invalid

After the Safe Harbor Framework, the European Court of Justice has now also invalidated the Privacy Shield Agreement. Personal data of European citizens may therefore no longer be exchanged with the USA under that agreement. That is still possible, however, under certain standard contracts.

High fines for use of fingerprints

Fingerprints, like other biometric data, are considered “special personal data”. They may be used only if a statutory exception applies. As a rule, time and attendance tracking of employees is unlikely to come under one of the statutory exceptions.

For more information or advice on this subject, please contact Lise van den Heuvel.