Can an employee refuse a suitable role during a reorganisation?

Yes, an employee can refuse an offered role, but the refusal may have consequences. In the Netherlands, the question “can my employee refuse a suitable role during a reorganisation” mainly depends on the employer’s redeployment duty (herplaatsingsplicht), overall reasonableness, and whether the work is genuinely “suitable” (passend). If the role is objectively suitable and the employer has documented this properly, a refusal can affect how UWV or a court assesses a dismissal route linked to dismissal due to reorganisation. At the same time, employees may have valid reasons to refuse, such as a major pay cut or an unreasonable commuting burden.

When is a role considered “suitable” in a reorganisation?

During a reorganisation, an employer must seriously examine whether the employee can be redeployed within a reasonable period. A role is “suitable” if it matches the employee’s skills, experience and capabilities, possibly after a reasonable onboarding or training period. UWV looks beyond job titles and focuses on the actual tasks and feasibility within the organisation.

Suitability is not a simple yes/no test. In practice, factors such as job level, content, working hours, work location and pay matter. The more the new role deviates from the original position, the more clearly the employer should explain why the offer is still reasonable and why other options are not available within the reorganisation.

Also note the difference between “available” and “suitable”. A vacancy may exist but still be unsuitable due to structural shift work, for example, or because it requires a qualification that cannot realistically be obtained within a reasonable timeframe. This is why a well-documented redeployment assessment is essential, especially if the process may end up at UWV.

• Alignment with education, experience and competencies (possibly with training)
• Reasonable conditions: pay, hours, location and working time patterns
• Realistic feasibility within a reasonable onboarding period
• Objective comparison with alternative internal options
• Proper documentation: role profile, meetings and rationale

What happens if an employee refuses a suitable role?

If an employer can demonstrate the role is suitable and the employee refuses without a solid reason, the employee’s position may weaken. In a dismissal request based on economic grounds, UWV can take into account that redeployment was possible but failed due to the employee’s stance. That can strengthen the employer’s argument that redeployment is not feasible in practice.

The key question in legal assessment is whether redeployment was possible within a reasonable period and whether the employee cooperated sufficiently. A refusal can also influence negotiations about a mutual termination arrangement, for example a settlement agreement for economic reasons. However, employees are not required to accept changes that are unreasonable in their impact.

From an HR perspective, documentation matters: record the offer, the explanation, any training options and the employee’s response. This creates clarity on whether the refusal was reasonable or whether it blocked a workable solution, such as an internal role change that the employer considers necessary.

• UWV may conclude redeployment was possible but did not proceed due to refusal
• The employer may be in a stronger position in a reorganisation dismissal route
• Negotiating dynamics can shift depending on the refusal grounds
• A clear file prevents disputes about what was actually offered
• The employee may be protected if the role is demonstrably not suitable

When is refusing reasonable? Practical examples

An employee can reasonably refuse if the role is not genuinely suitable. Examples include a clear downgrade in level or responsibilities without proper justification, or tasks that do not match the employee’s capabilities. A substantial and structural pay reduction can also be a serious factor, depending on the circumstances.

Commuting time and work location often become the tipping point during reorganisations. A limited change may be acceptable, but a structural and significant increase in commuting time can be unreasonable, particularly without compensation or where the employee has evidenced care responsibilities. It helps to be specific: how many extra hours per day, what costs, and which alternatives were discussed?

Example: an administrative employee is declared redundant and offered a customer support role with evening and weekend shifts. The content differs significantly, the working time pattern changes drastically, and there is no realistic training or onboarding plan. In such a case, refusal can be defensible. Sometimes it is also sensible to run an outplacement programme in parallel, allowing the employee to move towards suitable work outside the organisation when no realistic internal match exists.

• Structural shift to working times that do not fit the original pattern
• Major and lasting reduction in pay or hours without reasonable compensation
• Work at a clearly lower level without a sound justification
• Relocation leading to significantly longer commuting with limited alternatives
• Requirements (certificates/qualifications) not achievable within a reasonable time

How to handle this carefully: employer and employee steps

Careful handling starts with clarity on what the reorganisation requires, which roles disappear and which roles are available. Then comes the redeployment assessment: which roles are suitable, what development steps are needed and what timeframe is reasonable? It helps when HR and management use the same definitions and evaluation criteria, aligned with what a reorganisation involves.

For employers, it is crucial not only to offer a role, but to explain the rationale and explore options: adjusting hours, phased transition, training, or a trial period. For employees, it helps to respond concretely, ask targeted questions and substantiate objections. A general “this doesn’t fit” without specifics often escalates the discussion unnecessarily.

If no sustainable internal solution is possible, external support can reduce stress and uncertainty. With outplacement during a reorganisation, the focus is on labour market positioning, a practical job search strategy and a realistic next step. Also consider financial aspects such as the statutory transition payment if employment does end.

• Document the redeployment assessment: roles, requirements, trade-offs and meetings
• Make the offer concrete: tasks, hours, location, pay and start date
• Explore reasonable adjustments: training, onboarding period, phased transition
• Ask the employee to specify objections and test them for reasonableness
• Consider external guidance if internal matching is not feasible