Dismissal for poor performance: improvement process and response

Dismissal for poor performance: improvement process and response

An employer cannot simply say that you are not performing well enough. Dismissal for poor performance requires proper substantiation and a genuine opportunity to improve. Look beyond the latest review: what was your role, what feedback did you receive and what support was actually offered? This enables a targeted response and prevents a vague assessment quietly becoming an established file.

Ask for concrete examples and achievable improvement objectives.

Illness, training and working conditions must be considered separately.

Respond substantively in writing; do not accept inaccurate facts just to end the discussion quickly.

What does poor performance mean legally?

Poor performance concerns unsuitability for the agreed role, other than through illness or impairment. The employer must raise shortcomings in time and provide sufficient opportunity to improve. Training, working conditions and redeployment must also be considered. Whether those requirements are met depends on the specific circumstances. No universal form proves compliance for every employer. Job level, experience, earlier feedback and the nature of the work are relevant.

Start with the role and expected performance

Ask for the job description and the yardstick used to assess you. “More ownership” becomes discussable only when the expected behaviour is clear. Separate quality, speed, cooperation and availability. Check whether objectives change during the process and whether resources and authority match the responsibility. If you received new duties, record when that happened. Assessment of work for which you were not trained calls for a different explanation from ignoring known arrangements.

An improvement process must be workable

Record the improvement points, support offered, measurement of progress and evaluation dates. Duration must fit the work and required change; no general statutory minimum of three or six months exists. Ask who provides support and how much time is available. Write a businesslike summary after each meeting. This shows whether you actually have an opportunity to improve or are merely being judged against a conclusion already reached. Also establish a baseline: which files demonstrate the issue and what outcome counts as improvement? Record when promised coaching or system access actually became available. Use the same measure at evaluation so missing support is not silently attributed to your performance.

Responding to an inaccurate report

Use a table identifying each passage, your response and the supporting document. Acknowledge what is correct and explain differences without making every sentence personal. Ask for your written response to be added to the personnel file. If signing only to acknowledge receipt, say so clearly; first read what the signature declares. Completely ignoring an inaccurate report usually does not help, but a substantive objection also does not mean refusing every business decision.

Illness or overload changes the assessment

If health problems contribute, discuss them with the occupational physician. You do not need to give your diagnosis to your manager. Ask which adjustments or limitations matter for work and how objectives reflect them. A workplace conflict can exist alongside illness. Prevent medical inability being recorded as unwillingness. Continue responding to reasonable work arrangements within your capacity, and seek clarification from the appropriate expert when expectations are unclear.

Training and redeployment are not formalities

Ask what training, coaching or adjustments were investigated and which other suitable roles are available. Saying simply that there is “nothing else” does not show which departments, vacancies and skills were considered. Record your own proposals for alternative work or training. Redeployment does not require creating every conceivable role. A concrete overview does help focus discussion on what is actually possible within a reasonable period, with training where appropriate.

Dismissal proposal or proceedings: determine your aim

An employer may seek termination by the subdistrict court or offer a termination agreement. Starting an improvement process does not oblige you to sign. If you want to stay, focus on achievable improvement and the quality of the process. If you want to leave, have the end date, compensation, WW unemployment benefits and other arrangements assessed together. Continue meeting procedural response deadlines. Negotiating a settlement does not automatically postpone a hearing or statutory deadline.

Example of a useful improvement objective

A project employee is told she “lacks overview”. She asks for specifics. The parties then agree that every Monday she sends a status report with planning and obstacles, while her manager decides on escalations within two working days. After six weeks they examine the same files. This makes clear which action depends on whom. The example provides no dismissal guarantee, but shows why measurable mutual arrangements are more useful than a general judgment whose meaning changes after every evaluation.

Collect the job description, reviews and earlier positive feedback.

Request written objectives, support and evaluation dates.

Correct factual errors and keep evidence of your response.

Have training, medical factors and redeployment included.

Does an improvement process always last three months?

No. There is no fixed statutory duration for every case. The process must provide a genuine improvement opportunity given the role, experience and problems.

Must I sign a warning?

Check what your signature means. You can acknowledge receipt with a reservation and respond substantively in writing to facts you consider inaccurate.

Can I propose support?

Yes. Specify the training or coaching you need, why it is relevant and how the employer can assess progress.

Will I always receive additional compensation?

No. A transition payment and any additional compensation each have conditions. An unpleasant process alone does not automatically produce an extra award.

Sources and editorial notes
Sources current as of: October 17, 2026
1. Rijksoverheid: permitted grounds for dismissal
Publisher: Rijksoverheid
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/themas/werk/ontslag/betere-ontslagbescherming-payrollmedewerkers/vraag-en-antwoord/ontslag/wanneer-mag-ik-worden-ontslagen
2. Rechtspraak: employee dismissal proceedings
Publisher: Rechtspraak
https://www.rechtspraak.nl/onderwerpen/ontslag/verzoekschriftprocedure-werknemer
3. Rijksoverheid: employer dismissal procedure
Publisher: Rijksoverheid
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/vraag-en-antwoord/ontslag/personeel-ontslaan
The source publications are in Dutch. All language editions cover Dutch law.