Rechtbank Amsterdam, 16-09-2016, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2016:6674, C/13/613722 / KG ZA 16-999 MvdV/MB

RIPE is een non-profit organisatie die fungeert als Regionaal Internet Register voor Europa en omringende landen. Daarnaast ondersteunt RIPE door middel van coördinerende activiteiten de werking van het internet in Europa. RIPE faciliteert haar leden bij het aanvragen en beheren van IP-adressen. RIPE heeft in totaal 145 werknemers, verspreid over vestigingen in Amsterdam en Dubai.

[functie] van RIPE is [naam 1] en [functie] is [naam 3] . De voertaal binnen RIPE is Engels.

In de periode van november 2013 tot februari 2014 heeft de HR afdeling van RIPE deelgenomen aan een coaching traject. In een verslag hiervan, gedateerd 31 maart 2014, staat met betrekking tot [eiseres] onder meer het volgende:

“- Hoe kan u/je er voor zorgen dat ze minder emotioneel reageert?

(…)

Doel van de gesprekken was om de behoeftes die bij haar medewerkers liggen t.a.v. het gedrag van [eiseres] helder te krijgen. (…) Concreet inhoudelijk zijn de volgende punten aan de orde geweest en open met iedereen gecommuniceerd:

[naam 1] heeft jaarlijks het functioneren van [eiseres] met haar besproken. RIPE hanteert 6 beoordelingsniveaus, namelijk (van negatief naar positief): (1) Poor, (2) Needs Improvement (3) Acceptable Performance (4) Very Good Performance (5) Exceeding Expectations en (6) Exceptional Performance. In augustus 2015 heeft [eiseres] als overall beoordeling “Very Good Performance” gekregen.

Het onderwerp ‘Integrity’ werd beoordeeeld als ‘acceptable performance’, met als opmerking: “Generally no issue, however I would like you to keep any exchanges we have with regard to staff / company development confidential, unless I explicitly say it isn’t. I do not appreciate seniors coming to me in a flurry due to something I shared with you as a sounding board.”

Als commentaar heeft [naam 1] bij de algehele beoordeling vermeld:

“If I am somewhat more critical than usual, this is based on events and issues that need addressing. Overall, the HR department, and your work, is much appreciated universally. I would hope that together we can improve further on those items.”

Op 8 april 2016 heeft [eiseres] een e-mail aan [naam 1] gezonden, omdat deze haars inziens partij had gekozen voor [naam 5] , zonder [eiseres] om een weerwoord te vragen. In deze e-mail staat onder meer:

“The message you have given is to undermine your manager and step up to the senior. [naam 5] also informed me that “HR is not a safe Place.” This is totally not true, the reason for this is that the staff that approach [naam 5] are often the employees that have no further career path here. Why they would not approach me is due to the fact that I would be more professional and always put the organisation first. How would you feel if I went to your board without informing you first, this is the same situation.”

In reactie op de e-mail van 4 juli 2016 heeft [naam 1] aan [eiseres] onder meer meegedeeld:

“As you have been informed, we are of the opinion that your current behaviour and your behaviour over the (recent) past are not acceptable within an organisation as RIPE NCC. This means that it turned out that you are not able to deal with confidential information, something that is extremely important in your role as HR Manager. (…) We concluded that you are not able to manage (the personnel of) the HR department and to run specific HR projects, as proven by multiple escalations on the work place. Last but not least, you created an unprofessional and unpleasant working atmosphere on the HR department by reacting in a very rudimentary way, screaming to your colleagues and making inappropriate comments. This has given rise to complaints on the part of your colleagues and created a culture of fear within our organisation that is not acceptable.”

In de brief is aan [eiseres] een voorstel gedaan tot beëindiging van de arbeidsovereenkomst, op welk voorstel zij tot 12 juli 2016 kon reageren.

In een verklaring van 26 juli 2016 van de Ondernemingsraad (OR) van RIPE staat onder meer:“The OR has heard from various members of staff throughout the company over the years who have shared experiences where confidential and personal information which had been disclosed in private to HR was openly discussed in the office. Staff members have expressed fear of approaching HR when they’ve had conflict with their managers because they didn’t trust that HR would be neutral and impartial.

Staff members have shared with the OR their experiences of witnessing colleagues in [eiseres] ’s “bad books” being openly berated. The OR has concerns with how HR publicly dismiss staff members’ concerns or questions about HR’s processes and procedures in an unprofessional manner in front of the entire staff. The OR agrees that there are serious issues with confidentiality, lack of trust and professionalism in the department, mainly caused by [naam 4] and [eiseres] to the detriment of the organisation.”

In een verklaring van [naam 7] van 26 juli 2016 staat onder meer:

“I started working as a Customer Service Representative at the RIPE NCC a little more than 4 years ago. During my first week in the RIPE NCC my colleagues advised me not to share any personal informations with [eiseres] or [naam 4] , and that if I had any issue with my manager, to try to solve it myself rather than ask for help from HR.

I can recall one episode when one member of our staff members was on sickness leave, and I met [eiseres] in the elevator, and she just told me about the very private condition that this staff member was suffering, which I didn’t ask about. I found it very disturbing and I thought that I would never tell HR any of my private condition in case I had any in the future…

Since I moved up to the IT department I had to deal with them more often. In more than one occasion [eiseres] got very upset because something in her laptop was not working properly, especially one particular episode when she started smashing the mouse on the table and screaming at me because one of her files was lost. (…) This kind of behaviour happened with [eiseres] too; she wanted to have an IT person in her office permanently so she could scream at him/her without leaving her desk. While I understand that every person can have a bad moment, I think this kind of behaviour contributed to the bad feeling that a lot of people are referring to, like being scared that you go on their black list, your life is gonna be miserable.”

[naam 8] , IT medewerker van RIPE, heeft op 26 juli 2016 verklaard:

“Feedback on [eiseres] & [naam 4]

Op 27 juli 2016 heeft [naam 1] onder meer het volgende verklaard:

“Over time, there have been a number of escalations of an interpersonal nature, within the HR department. I have given advice to Ms [eiseres] and encouraged bringing in third party facilitators / coaches to work on these issues. Group sessions have taken place over time, as well as individual coaching. Over the years it happened regularly that Ms [eiseres] found herself in personal conflict situations, stemming from her work. This she has admitted many times; it so happened that she was not on speaking terms with staff members for weeks. I did ask her to overcome these behaviour patterns, as they were counterproductive and not appropriate for an professional of her position. (…) Ms [eiseres] herself is known for her rather impulsive style of interaction. Generally, it is tolerated out of the sense that she means well and has the good of the organisation at heart. Unfortunately, regularly her impulsiveness led to use of inappropriate language, which I have received negative comments on. (…)

Confidentiality, or the perceived lack of trust in her confidentiality standards, has been a topic between Ms [eiseres] and myself for many years. (…) It was not until spring this year that – during an informational talk with a staff member – I became aware that these problems had not been resolved by far; indeed, that the atmosphere in the department was once again highly volatile.(…) It was after I received this information, indicating that the situation was much more serious and negatively impacting staff and work quality of the department (…) that I decided that (…) I would have to rely on a neutral third party to gather information (…). After being presented with [naam 2] ’s report I decided that strong and immediate action was called for in order to bring peace and work quality back to the department (…)”

Een verklaring van [naam 9] , voormalig medewerker van RIPE, van

2 augustus 2016, luidt, voor zover hier van belang, als volgt:

“[eiseres] had a reputation across the RIPE NCC as the ‘source of all gossip. Discretion was never her mode of operation. (…) Rather than share interesting or relevant company developments that might influence strategy and decision making, she’d launch into tales of who was having an affair, suffering from depression, off sick, likely to lose their job.”

[naam 6] heeft op 4 augustus 2016 onder meer het volgende verklaard:

“Na mijn HBO studie (…) ben ik op 4 augustus 2014 in dienst getreden bij de RIPE NCC in de functie van HR Administrator voor 30 uur per week. (…) De vacature was ontstaan omdat de voorgaande HR administrator ( [naam 10] ) op non actief is gesteld en daarna is ontslagen. De reden voor het ontslag was disfunctioneren en samenspannen met haar collega [naam 4] . Na dit ontslag heeft [eiseres] besloten om niet meer in haar “eigen” kantoor te gaan zitten. Zij is er toen bij komen zitten op haar eigen afdeling om meer “grip” te krijgen op de situatie. (…)

Eind 2014 begin 2015 hebben wij een meeting gehad met de HR afdeling en de [functie] . Het doel van deze meeting was het opstellen van een missie, visie en strategie voor de HR afdeling. Hetgeen wat vooral naar voren kwam tijdens deze meeting is dat wij een professionele HR afdeling wilde zijn, waarbij mensen terecht kunnen voor HR gerelateerde vraagstukken. Om dit te kunnen bereiken heeft [naam 3] ( [functie] ) tegen [eiseres] gezegd dat het wel van belang is dat zij zorgvuldiger om zal moeten gaan met confidential information. [eiseres] gaf aan om hier aan te gaan werken. (…)

Tijdens mijn dagelijkse werkzaamheden zaten wij altijd met zijn vieren in het kantoortje. (…) Hierdoor was ik vaak onbewust “aanwezig” bij diverse gesprekken met managers, seniors en medewerkers. Deze gesprekken konden wel eens een emotionele wending krijgen.

Een voorbeeld hiervan is: de GII Manager kwam binnenlopen met een personeelsvraagstuk. Aangezien [eiseres] het niet met hem eens was sprak zij met verheven stem waardoor de Manager is vertrokken zonder zijn vraagstuk echt bespreekbaar te kunnen maken. [eiseres] is hierop aangesproken door een van de Senior Managers.

Dit is meerdere keren voorgekomen. Indien de HR Manager ergens niet mee eens was kregen sommige personen een reactie waar haar emotie bij betrokken werd. Een ander voorbeeld hiervan is een medewerker van IT, die de HR Manager wilde helpen met haar computer. Omdat hij het probleem elke keer niet goed opgelost werd heeft zij na enige tijd naar hem geschreeuwd, dit was in de trand van : “go away now” and don’t touch my computer anymore. (…) Begin april is [naam 5] naar [naam 1] gegaan om met hem te bespreken dat zij niet “gehoord” werd binnen de afdeling, wanneer zij kwam met nieuwe ideeën. Een vervolg hierop was een lunch afspraak waarbij [eiseres] was uitgenodigd om met [naam 3] [naam 1] deze knelpunten te bespreken. (…) Sinds deze lunch is de sfeer binnen de afdeling niet meer werkbaar geweest. [naam 5] werd eerst vooral door [eiseres] genegeerd, maar later deed ook [naam 4] hier aan mee. Er hing ontzettend veel spanning binnen de afdeling. Wat op iedereen zijn weerslag had.

Er zijn diverse meetingen geweest met [naam 1] , [naam 3] , [eiseres] , [naam 5] en later ook [naam 4] . Uiteindelijk is er besloten om een Interim Adviseur te laten komen. (…)

Met een dubbel gevoel heb ik dit alles genoteerd, aangezien ik mij altijd gewaardeerd heb gevoeld door mijn Manager [eiseres].”

Op 12 augustus 2016 heeft RIPE een ontbindingsverzoek ter zake van de arbeidsovereenkomst met [eiseres] ingediend bij de kantonrechter van deze rechtbank. Naast de hiervoor vermelde verklaringen zijn daarbij nog twee verklaringen overgelegd, van [naam 5] en van de voormalige HR medewerker

[naam 11] . In de verklaring van [naam 5] staat onder meer:

“The feedback (…) was always given by both [eiseres] and [naam 4] on Monday Morning (…) The feedback came as a surprise and was given in a negative and destructive way. (…) Before she went on maternity leave [naam 5] ( [naam 5] , vzr.) was also witness of emotional discussions of [naam 11] and [eiseres] which always ended in shouting and being angry at each other. These conflicts were shared with the rest of the department but also with other Middle Managers. (…)

In 2013 it was a very busy period. (…) The irritation in the department was rising and [eiseres] started to scream at [naam 10] in front of [naam 5] and [naam 4] without giving a reason. (…)

After the escalation with [naam 10] the whole department went into a coaching trajectory in the beginning of 2014 to improve the communication in the department (…). [eiseres] did not have a coaching question. The coach was asking the other department members what [eiseres] could improve. When mentioned that she creates the feeling of fear and instability by her top down approach she was not able to take that feedback on board. The coaching ended with the agreement that they should improve on the communication style in the HR department. However, in March 2014 [naam 10] was released of duty very sudden.(…) On Monday 18-04-16 in the department meeting “Future Plans” with [naam 3] [naam 6] and [naam 4] confirm that the communication in the department needs to improve and that we need more

guidance and strategy.

On Tuesday, 19-04-16 [naam 5] received an email from [eiseres] where she offered het excuses to [naam 5] and encouraged her to speak up.

Om Monday 09-05-16 [naam 5] was back from two weeks holiday ad found the situation in the department being back to the period before [eiseres] had offered her excuses to [naam 5] . [naam 6] was the only one talking normally to [naam 5] on that day.”

De verklaring van [naam 11] bevat (onder meer) de volgende passages:

“I’ve been out of the company for a good few years now but am actually still very much affected by my direct manager’s behaviour as I’m convinced I would still be working there if it hadn’t been for [eiseres] . (…)

She frequently spoke down to me in front of the department colleagues. I called her on it a number of times but it was never sorted.

(…)

Her level of ‘confidentiality’ was pretty much a joke if you were in her ‘circle’ of managers. (…) Complain an you’re out. Simple as. (…) There are plenty of others who would say the same and none of us understand why it has been allowed.”

In een verklaring van [naam 12] , bij RIPE gedurende 14 jaar werkzaam geweest als software engineer en business analyst, van 15 augustus 2016 is vermeld dat [eiseres] werkgerelateerde kwesties wat hem betreft altijd ‘handled in a professional and confidential manner’. In de verklaring staat ook:

“As the HR manager you went the extra mile with so many staff, especially the non Dutch staff members. You were always there to sort out issues that affected their lives here in the Netherlands, even when they were not directly work related. I had no problem approaching you with some very personal issuers that I needed advice and support with. You handled those in the same professional and confidential manner as you did with other work related issues.”

Productie 22 van [eiseres] bevat de bevindingen van [naam 2] , te weten “Findings HR Department”. Daarin staat onder meer:• Lack of Leadership

(…)

• Disturbed working relationships

(…)

• Confidentiality issue

• Feared”