On October 28, 2026, the Amsterdam District Court ruled that Booking would be granted substitute consent to require its employees to spend at least 40% of their working hours in the office. This authorization was necessary because the works council had not approved the proposed change to the work-from-home policy.<\/p>\n\n
According to the subdistrict court judge, Booking has sufficiently demonstrated that it has a reasonable interest in requiring employees to be present at the office. The judge agreed with Booking\u2019s argument that physical presence can contribute to better collaboration, professional development, team cohesion, and coordination. Booking cited scientific research showing that hybrid work\u2014partly at home and partly in the office\u2014can contribute to greater engagement, a better work-life balance, and the prevention of social isolation. According to Booking, hybrid work is therefore not only in the interest of the company but also of individual employees.<\/p>\n\n
The Works Council countered that mandatory office attendance has negative consequences for employees, including additional travel time and travel expenses, as well as a worsened work-life balance. However, after weighing the interests involved, the labor court judge ruled that the Works Council could not reasonably have refused to give its consent.<\/p>\n\n
The ruling comes a day after it was announced that the American media company Skydance requires its employees to work in the office five days a week. This could also have far-reaching consequences for the Amsterdam office, which has approximately 240 employees.<\/p>\n\n
It remains to be seen whether such a five-day office requirement can be implemented in the Netherlands without further ado. On June 3, 2025, the Amsterdam District Court refused to grant Asus substitute authorization for a change to its work-from-home policy. Whereas employees previously were required to work in the office for a maximum of two days per week, Asus wanted to require them to be present for at least three days. According to the subdistrict court judge, Asus had not sufficiently substantiated its interests in this change in light of the objections raised by the works council. If the Works Council\u2019s consent is also required at Skydance, the company will need to thoroughly substantiate its interest in a five-day office attendance requirement, especially given the potential consequences such a requirement could have for employees.<\/p>\n\n
The rulings regarding Booking and Asus show that changes to work-from-home policies are possible, but not a given. A sound rationale and careful consideration of the interests of both the employer and the employees are essential in this regard.<\/p>\n\n
Are you an employer looking to amend your work-from-home policy, or is your works council facing a proposed change? Wessel Van der Lans Advocaten advises employers and works councils on their rights, the works council\u2019s right of consent, and the legal options available when making changes to the work-from-home policy.<\/p>\n\n