The employee started working at Chetu in January 2019 and said he was making moneymore than €70,000 per year in the form of
The telemarketer answered in twoof the day: “I don’t feel comfortable with cameras watching me for nine hours a day. This is an invasion of my privacy and it makes me feel very uncomfortable. That's why my camera is not enabled. You can already track all activities on my laptop and I share my screen." He was fired on August 26 for "refusal to work" and "insubordination".
A few weeks later, the plaintiff suedZeeland and West Brabant in Tilburg, stating that "no urgent reasons were given to justify immediate dismissal". He argued that the dismissal was disproportionate to the misconduct and that the requirement to leave his webcam on was unreasonable and contrary to data privacy regulations.
The court agreed that the dismissal had nolegal force. “The employer did not sufficiently explain the reasons for dismissal. At the same time, there was no evidence of refusal to work, just as there was no reasonable order. The instruction to leave the camera on is contrary to the worker's right to respect for his privacy, ”the court said.
Instead, Chetu claimed that the webcam was nothingno different from if the employee was in the office under the supervision of management. The District Court found it unlikely that Chetu intended to store the webcam images and said data privacy was irrelevant.
Instead, he cited Article 8 of the Europeanconventions on human rights and a decision of the European Court of Justice, which clearly states that “strict conditions are imposed on the supervision of workers”. The court ruled that the requirement to leave the camera on was an unreasonable intrusion on the plaintiff's right to privacy.
The court ordered Chetu Inc. to pay the man more than €2,700 in unpaid wages, €8,375 for wrongful dismissal, €9,500 in reassignment assistance and €50,000 in additional compensation.In addition, the company must pay the dismissed employee 23 unused vacation days, 8 percent statutory vacation pay, and possibly an additional fine for failing to submit a payslip for August.Chetu must also cover approximately €585 in legal costs and the plaintiff's legal fees.The account will also be responsible for interest on late payment.
In a ruling issued at the end of September and published on Wednesday, the court also invalidated the non-compete and confidentiality provisions of the employment contract.In civil cases in the Netherlands, where the value of the judgment exceeds €1,750, an appeal may bebe filed by either party within three months of the judgment.
Less than a week after the plaintiff was firedbranch of Chetu Inc. in Rijswijk was deregistered with the Chamber of Commerce and closed on Sept. 2, records show. The branch was first registered in the Netherlands on 1 June 2013 with a stated capital of €10 million. Atal Bansal was listed as the director of the Dutch branch. According to Forbes, he is the founder and CEO of a US company.
Read more:
See what a woman, a priest and a bishop looked like in the Middle Ages. Their faces are alive
Recreate the Sun on Earth: how physicists solved the main problem of thermonuclear fusion
Created a compact nuclear reactor for safe energy production