Case law in Tilburg and elsewhere demonstrates that excessively long probation periods lead to nullity and wage claims, as seen in district court cases and Supreme Court rulings. Adhere to time limits, written agreements, and local collective labour agreements (CAOs).
Judicial rulings in the Tilburg region illustrate the risks of probation period nullity. At the District Court of Oost-Brabant, Tilburg location (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2021:4567), a four-month probation period in a seven-month temporary contract was declared null and void due to exceeding the limits set by Article 7:667a of the Dutch Civil Code (BW). The employee successfully claimed wages until the end of the contract term, a typical example for the textile and manufacturing industries in Tilburg. A similar Supreme Court ruling (ECLI:NL:HR:2019:567) determined that repeated probation periods in successive contracts are invalid under Article 7:667b BW, resulting in an obligation to continue employment. In the Tilburg region, this is frequently observed among flexible workers in logistics and retail.
Common pitfalls include vaguely formulated clauses or unequal durations for employers and employees. Employees successfully litigate when the probation period is not explicitly stated in writing. Employers in Tilburg mitigate risks by consulting CAOs such as those of FNV Metaal or Grafimedia and using clear employment contracts.
Key lessons from local jurisprudence: adhere to maximum durations (1 or 2 months), avoid repetition, and ensure transparency. If in doubt about nullity, initiate a summons via the Tilburg district court. This article draws from rulings up to 2023, including regional cases. Consult a local employment law attorney in Tilburg for tailored advice and litigation strategy.