Consulting the rank and file vs. confidentiality: why does it sometimes chafe for the works council? % The Legal Company

Employment Law

30 October 2025

Consulting the rank and file vs. confidentiality: why does it sometimes chafe for the works council?

Stelt u zich eens voor: u werkt al jaren met dezelfde zelfstandige. Hij stuurt facturen, factureert btw en heeft een eigen kvk-nummer. Toch krijgt u in 2026 ineens vragen van de Belastingdienst over de aard van uw samenwerking. Hoe heeft het zo ver kunnen komen?

When major decisions are made within a company – think of reorganisations, mergers, or changes to terms of employment – the works council plays an important role. The works council represents the employees in consultation with the employer and must be able to think along and co-decide on such plans. At the same time, the works council also has an obligation to think along with the entrepreneur. After all, the works council is established to serve the proper functioning of the business in all its objectives. In practice, the works council therefore wears two hats.

But what if the works council wants to consult its rank and file, to hear what employees think about this, while the information obtained by the works council is precisely supposed to remain confidential? This creates a tension: the right to consult employees versus the statutory duty of confidentiality.

The legal framework in brief

The Dutch Works Councils Act (WOR) contains two important provisions:

Section 17(1) WOR: the works council may consult employees (the so-called “rank-and-file consultation”) if this is necessary to properly perform its task.
Section 20 WOR: the works council must keep confidential information secret if the entrepreneur (employer) has designated it as such.

The legislature deliberately included both rules:

On the one hand, the works council must be able to involve employees and gauge support.
On the other hand, the business must be able to rely on confidentiality, because premature or incomplete information can lead to major unrest or even damage.

What happens in practice?

In practice, this regularly clashes. Suppose a works council hears from the entrepreneur that a reorganisation may be coming. The figures, plans and scenarios are confidential and subject to a duty of secrecy. However, the works council wants to know what matters to employees – for example, whether they would rather be relocated to another region or opt for a departure scheme.

May the works council then talk to the employees?

That depends on the circumstances. A balancing of interests must then be made between the interests of the business and the interests of the employees. Relevant factors include, among others:

The nature of the information: is it commercially sensitive or competition-sensitive information, such as in ongoing tenders or reorganisations? In that case, the interest in confidentiality may weigh more heavily, especially if disclosure could have harmful consequences for the business (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2025:2448, paras. 4.7-4.9).
The consequences for employees: if the proposed decision has major consequences for staff (for example, dismissal or a change in terms of employment), the works council’s interest in consulting the rank and file may weigh more heavily (ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2020:2643, para. 3.4).
The possibility of consultation under conditions: sometimes, despite confidentiality, the works council can still consult (to a limited extent) with the rank and file if arrangements are made about this, such as sharing options without sensitive details or under embargo (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2025:2448, paras. 4.8-4.9).
The risk of harm upon disclosure: the likelihood that disclosure will lead to disproportionate harm to the business, for example because competitors gain an advantage or the business’s position is undermined (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2025:2448, para. 4.7).
Alternatives to full disclosure: the extent to which the works council is enabled to perform its participation task without all information being disclosed, for example through consultation with trade unions under confidentiality or by providing summaries (ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2020:2643, para. 3.6).

Conclusion

The right to consult the rank and file is essential for well-functioning employee participation: without contact with employees, the works council becomes estranged from what is happening on the work floor. At the same time, the duty of confidentiality is needed to safeguard trust and prevent unrest or harm to the organisation. After all, the works council must keep the interests of the business in view. It is therefore always a matter of weighing things up on a case-by-case basis.

Do you have questions about the works council or employment law? Then contact the corporate lawyers at The Legal Company via info@thelegalcompany.nl or call 020-3450152.

De afgelopen jaren stonden in het teken van de Wet VBAR, het wetsvoorstel dat een einde moest maken aan onduidelijkheid over de zzp’er. Het kabinet heeft delen van dat voorstel inmiddels geschrapt. Op het eerste gezicht is dat goed nieuws: minder regels, minder administratieve last. Maar in de praktijk blijven dezelfde toetsen overeind.

“De inhoud van de samenwerking is leidend, niet wat er op papier staat.”

De Belastingdienst handhaaft sinds 1 januari 2025 weer actief op schijnzelfstandigheid. En recente uitspraken van de Hoge Raad bevestigen dat rechters strikt toetsen of er sprake is van ondergeschiktheid en gezagsverhouding.

Voor uw praktijk betekent dit drie dingen. Een: leg de samenwerking duidelijk vast, met aandacht voor de inhoud. Twee: voorkom dat een zzp’er feitelijk werkt als werknemer. Drie: wees voorbereid op een controle, en weet hoe u de relatie kunt herzien als dat moet.

Heeft u vragen over uw concrete situatie? Wij sparren dagelijks met opdrachtgevers over hun zzp-relaties. Vraag een offerte op of bekijk onze Legal Safe abonnementen.