Good Employer Practices in the Netherlands (Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code)

Eva Jongepier - employment lawyer in the Netherlands
April 23rd, 2026

Good Employer Practices (Goed Werkgeverschap) under Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code

Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code imposes on both employer and employee a duty to behave as a goed werkgever and goed werknemer respectively - in English, as a good employer and a good employee. The provision is deliberately formulated as an open norm: it does not prescribe specific conduct, but requires that both parties act in accordance with the requirements of reasonableness and good faith that the employment relationship demands.

For employers, Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code has been invoked across an enormous range of situations. Dutch courts have used it to:

Require employers to take out accident insurance for employees working in hazardous circumstances where the legal duty under Article 7:658 of the Dutch Civil Code did not apply directly (Supreme Court, De Rooyse Wissel 2008; Supreme Court, TNT/Wijenberg 2012).
Impose an obligation to make reasonable proposals for change to employment conditions rather than leaping to dismissal (the Stoof/Mammoet doctrine).
Require consultation with the employee before taking decisions with significant personal impact, such as relocation or restructuring.
Limit the use of contractual rights where exercise would be disproportionate - for example, enforcing a non-competition clause against an employee whose role was eliminated in a reorganisation.
Mandate that employers respond adequately to reports of workplace harassment or a hostile work environment.

Goed werkgeverschap and dismissal under Dutch law

In the context of dismissal, Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code requires that the employer follow a fair process: warn the employee, build a dossier, offer an improvement programme, and consult before terminating. Courts have awarded billijke vergoeding - fair compensation on top of the transition payment - where the dismissal process was substantively correct but procedurally deficient in ways that violated the good employer norm.

The duty of good employership also extends post-employment: an employer who provides a reference that is inaccurate or disproportionately negative may be held liable. For the employee-side equivalent, see good employee practices. For the broader dismissal framework, see termination of employment in the Netherlands and employment lawyers in the Netherlands.

The good employer principle as one of the most extensively used provisions in Dutch labour law, applied to innovations that later became statutory rights: liability for employee-caused damage, the right of partially disabled workers to adapted working conditions, the right to convert full-time to part-time contracts, and the right to vocational training. The Supreme Court has held that courts must nonetheless respect the employer's margin of appreciation in organising operations, limiting judicial intervention primarily to procedural tests - whether the employer heard both sides, carefully weighed the interests, and gave reasons for the decision.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can an employee sue the employer directly on the basis of Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code?

Yes. Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code is a directly enforceable provision of the employment contract. An employee who suffers loss because the employer acted contrary to the good employer norm can claim damages in the kantonrechter (sub-district court). The claim must specify how the employer's conduct deviated from what a reasonable employer would have done in the same circumstances.

What is the relationship between Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code and Article 7:658 of the Dutch Civil Code (employer liability for workplace accidents)?

Article 7:658 of the Dutch Civil Code imposes strict safety obligations and a presumption of employer liability for accidents at work. Where 7:658 BW does not apply - for example, for accidents during activities organised by but not strictly part of work, such as a staff outing - the Supreme Court has used Article 7:611 of the Dutch Civil Code to require employers to have insurance in place, making the employer indirectly liable for the uninsured loss. The two provisions operate in parallel, not as alternatives.

Does good employership require an employer to offer internal mediation before dismissal?

Courts do not mandate mediation in every case, but they expect employers to make genuine efforts to resolve workplace conflicts before resorting to dismissal. Where a relationship has broken down (the g-grond under Article 7:669 of the Dutch Civil Code), courts regularly ask whether the employer explored mediation, offered a change of team or supervisor, or took other de-escalation measures. Failure to do so can result in a higher billijke vergoeding award.

Can an employer claim that a works council approval satisfies the good employer obligation?

Works council consent under the WOR fulfils the collective consultation requirement, but does not replace the individual good employer obligation. An employer who has works council approval for a restructuring must still deal fairly with each individual employee - consulting them personally, considering alternatives, and offering reasonable conditions. The two obligations run concurrently.