Prohibition on Additional Work (Nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding) in the Netherlands

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

Prohibition on Additional Work (Nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding) under Article 7:653a of the Dutch Civil Code

The nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding is a clause in an employment contract that restricts or prohibits the employee from performing paid work for other employers or clients alongside their main employment. Such clauses are common in Dutch employment contracts, particularly in sectors where conflicts of interest, confidentiality risks, or workload concerns are relevant.

Since 1 August 2022, Dutch law has significantly restricted the use of nevenwerkzaamhedenbedingen. Following the implementation of the EU Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive (2019/1152) through new Article 7:653a of the Dutch Civil Code, a prohibition on additional work is only enforceable if the employer can demonstrate a valid objective justification. A blanket prohibition without justification is no longer permitted.

Grounds for Objective Justification under Article 7:653a of the Dutch Civil Code

Article 7:653a of the Dutch Civil Code lists the recognised grounds for justifying a nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding:

Health and safety concerns - for example, an employee who drives professionally and must comply with working time regulations.
Protection of business confidentiality - where additional work would risk disclosure of trade secrets.
Integrity of the public service - specifically for certain public sector roles.
Avoidance of conflicts of interest - where the additional work is for a direct competitor.
Violation of applicable working time legislation - where additional work would breach the Arbeidstijdenwet.

The justification does not need to be written into the employment contract itself; the employer may provide it at the time the employee requests permission to perform additional work. However, the employer cannot retroactively invent a justification - it must arise from genuine circumstances.

Practical consequences under Dutch employment law

An employee subject to an unjustifiable nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding may now perform additional work without being in breach of contract, and may not be dismissed solely on the basis of doing so. Employers who discover additional work being performed should first assess whether they have a valid justification before taking disciplinary action. For related clauses, see non-solicitation clauses, confidentiality clauses, and employment contracts. Consult an employment lawyer in the Netherlands for specific clause questions. moonlighting has grown substantially in the Netherlands: in 2005 only 5.5% of the active population held multiple jobs; by 2017 this had risen to 7.5%, representing approximately 600,000 persons. Article 5:15(6) of the Working Hours Act (Arbeidstijdenwet) requires employees working for multiple employers to inform each employer spontaneously and in a timely manner of all information about their other work necessary for applying the working time rules. For civil servants, Article 61 ARAR additionally prohibits additional work that is detrimental to the proper performance of public duties.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can an employer still prohibit additional work after August 2022?

Yes, but only with objective justification under Article 7:653a of the Dutch Civil Code. The clause must be aimed at one of the recognised interests (health and safety, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, working time compliance, or public integrity). A blanket prohibition without any specific justification is unenforceable. Employers should review existing contracts and update them to include the grounds for the restriction.

Can an employer dismiss an employee for doing a second job?

Only if the additional work causes demonstrable harm - such as a direct conflict of interest, breach of confidentiality, or violation of working time rules - and the employer has a valid justification for the prohibition. Dismissal solely because an employee has a side job, without any demonstrable impact on the employment relationship, is likely to be found disproportionate and without reasonable ground under Article 7:669 of the Dutch Civil Code.

Does the nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding apply to self-employment (ZZP) activities?

Yes. The restriction applies to all forms of additional gainful activity, including freelance and self-employed work. An employee who sets up a competing ZZP practice alongside their employment falls within the scope of the clause, provided the employer has a valid justification - most commonly conflict of interest or confidentiality concerns. The scope of the restriction should be clearly defined in the contract.

Can an employer require the employee to request prior permission for additional work?

Yes. A permission requirement (prior notification and approval) is a common and enforceable form of the nevenwerkzaamhedenbeding, provided the employer's grounds for withholding permission align with the Article 7:653a of the Dutch Civil Code justifications. A blanket refusal without substantive grounds is no longer acceptable. Employers should process permission requests promptly and give reasoned decisions, since an unjustified refusal means the employee is free to proceed regardless.