Search

Newsletter

The Request for Advice and the Obligation to Provide Information

Section 31 of the WOR provides that the employer must provide the Works Council with all information and data reasonably required for the performance of their duties. Pursuant to Section 25 of the WOR, the employer must furthermore provide a statement of the grounds for the projected decision, the anticipated consequences (for the staff), and his projected measures on account thereof - without being asked - within the framework of a request for advice. The employer is obliged to provide this information simultaneously with the request for advice. On 5 December 2008 the Enterprise Section confirmed that these requirements also apply in the case of a request for advice in broad outline.

The Facts

During a consultative meeting between the Works Council and the employer, a water laboratory, it was mentioned that the employer had been engaged in talks about a possible merger for about one year already. After this consultative meeting the Works Council requested the director various times to provide further information about a number of topics related to the merger, and to make arrangements about the role of the Works Council. The employer did not respond to this request. Some months later, on 12 February 2008, the employer requested the advice of the Works Council about the projected merger. However, the request for advice did not contain the information about the consequences for the staff to be expected and the measures to be taken in connection therewith. Despite various requests of the Works Council to that effect, the employer also refused to provide this information later. In brief, the employer took the position that he did not have to provide the information about the consequences for the staff and the social plan, because he only requested advice about the merger resolution in broad outline, and the consequences for the staff would be addressed in a procedure to follow afterwards.

The Works Council was of the view that this was a violation of its right to information. It stated that, because of the lack of the requested information, it felt unable to give advice about the projected merger. Nevertheless, the employer stated to the Works Council on 24 June 2008 that he had meanwhile taken the decision to go ahead with the merger. The Works Council was of the view that the employer should have awaited its advice and that without the advice of the Works Council he could not reasonably have reached his decision. The Works Council then brought an appeal to the Enterprise Section against the employer's decision.

Decision of the Enterprise Section

The Enterprise Section was of the view that the provision of information by the director had been slow and defective. In addition, the employer had not provided a part of the information requested to the Works Council at all. It does not make a difference that it concerned an advice and questions in broad outline. The Enterprise Section referred to Section 25(3) of the WOR, from which it arises that the projected merger resolution should have been provided with an overview of the expected consequences for the staff and the measures taken on account thereof.

Against this background the Enterprise Section ruled that the employer could not reasonably have reached his decision. The Enterprise Section ordered the employer to withdraw the decision and to undo the consequences thereof.

Tips:
  • Along with the request for advice, it is necessary to include an overview of the ground(s) for the decision, an overview of the consequences the decision will have for the employees, and of the measures intended on account thereof. In principle this rule applies also if the request for advice concerns broad outlines.
  • If the Works Council asks for more information, the employer should accede to this as much as possible. It follows from established case law that in principle it is not up to the employee, but to the Works Council to determine what information it needs to be able to give an advice as referred to in Article 25 of the WOR.
  • Finally, it is advisable- even though Section 25(3) of the WOR does not set this as a condition - to provide the above-mentioned overviews in writing. This way unnecessary misunderstandings can be avoided.
Share this:   
linkedin facebook twitter email
Ester Damen

Tel: +31 20 5506 667
E-mail: ester.damen@kvdl.nl

View our profile

linkedin