Already an account? Log in

    Try HRM Rendement

    With 13 published issues in a calendar year HRM Rendement offers the most up to date answers to your professional questions with news, themes and articles.

    Subscribe to HRM Rendement for the next three months for only € 3, excluding VAT (normal price is € 99 per year). This offer applies to a business trial subscription, valid until cancellation. The General Terms and Conditions can be found on

    Fill out the form below and subscribe

    Are you interested in similar English publications? Rendement also offers (about Dutch payroll regulations), (about Dutch tax regulations) and (about Dutch financial SME-news).Try these publications for three months each for € 3, excluding VAT. Normal price is €99 per year.

    Try these publications for three months each for € 3, excluding VAT. Normal price is €99 per year.

    Promo code (when available)

    We ask you to agree to our General Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

    When clicking on subscribe, you automatically give permission to receive the newsletter and offers, with which we inform you about relevant products and services of Rendement Uitgeverij BV. If you do not want this, please contact us via You can also withdraw the consent at any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link at the bottom of each email.

    No increase in working hours or higher mortgage

    The Court of The Hague has recently made an interesting ruling on the application of the ‘Wet flexibel werken’ (Flexible Working Act), abbreviated as WFW.


    Because renovation costs turned out higher than anticipated, an employee tried to take out a bigger mortgage. The respective mortgage provider stated that this was possible, but only if the employee’s working hours would be increased from 36 to 40 hours per week. The employee sent a request to the employer to work more hours, but the employer only rejected this request months later. Because the response to the request took so long, the employee assumed that on the basis of the WFW his working hours had been adjusted automatically. However, the judge instead ruled that the deadline to respond stated in the WFW does not apply to the government institution the employee worked for. For government institutions, alternative deadlines are instead regulated by the respective collective labor agreement. The judge also ruled that the employer was not entirely to blame for the late response, as a lot of changes were implemented in government institutions at the time. Moreover, it was ruled that the employer had the right to reject the request, as there was no room to give staff more working hours.

    Court of The Hague, April 28, 2021; ECLI (abridged): 4532

    Share this article on: