Skip to main content

ECLI:NL:GHARL:2024:6311

The employee has worked as a general sales associate for the employer since April 1, 2022. On September 6, 2023, he receives an email from the director, his direct supervisor. In this email, the director points out an error he made when sending documents, which resulted in a third party gaining access to financial information not intended for them. The next day, on September 7, 2023, the employee sends a WhatsApp message to his employer stating that it might be best if he leaves the company. The director responds, expressing a desire to discuss this. The employee replies that he won’t leave too hastily and would like to discuss the best way to arrange a settlement agreement.

On September 22, 2023, a meeting takes place in which the settlement agreement is discussed. However, the employee does not sign the agreement. On October 3, 2023, he posts a message on LinkedIn in which he officially says farewell to the employer. A day later, he specifies October 2023 as the end date of his employment on LinkedIn.

On October 27, 2023, the employer formally confirms that the employee is resigning effective November 1, 2023. The employee disagrees and requests that the court annul the resignation, asserting that he never formally resigned and that this was not his intention.

The Subdistrict Court ruled that the employee did resign from his employment contract, and the Court of Appeal upheld the Subdistrict Court’s judgment.

Clear and Unambiguous Resignation

When an employee resigns from an employment relationship, reliance on their resignation is only justified if their statement is “clear and unambiguous” and is intended to end the employment relationship.

This standard is intended to protect the employee from the serious consequences of voluntary termination, such as losing dismissal protection and entitlement to unemployment benefits. An employer should not lightly assume that a statement is intended as voluntary termination of employment. In certain circumstances, the employer has a duty to investigate; they must confirm whether the employee truly wished to terminate the employment contract. Additionally, the employer has an obligation to inform the employee of the consequences of resignation.

Judgment of the Court

The Court of Appeal ruled that the employee terminated his employment contract. The WhatsApp message indicates that he made the decision to leave the company and begin organizing the handover process. Following this message, two discussions took place between the employer and employee, where they thoroughly discussed the reason for the resignation, the resignation itself, and its consequences. In these discussions, the employee took the initiative to discuss the termination of his employment.

The employer could reasonably assume that the employee had resigned. His actions, such as the LinkedIn posts, suggest that he was committed to his resignation. The employer fulfilled its duty to investigate by engaging in dialogue with the employee. Employer and employee also had extensive discussions about safeguarding his unemployment rights, with the employer even making an effort to support this.

Conclusion

An employee’s statement regarding their resignation must be clear and unambiguous. The employer cannot simply assume that the employee fully understands the consequences of such a statement. The employer is obligated to verify that the employee truly intended to resign and was aware of the consequences of doing so.

Do you have questions on this topic or another employment law issue? Please contact the author of this post, Julia Schets, at j.schets@valegis.com, or one of the other members of our employment law team.