WijEindhoven appears before the ‘College voor de Rechten van de Mens’ (human rights council) due to a dispute with a (former) employee. The former employee believes she was dismissed on incorrect grounds.
Bajawrhi-Faiz, as the employee is called, believes that she has been treated incorrectly by the social institution, her lawyer Tom Meevis said. “She was twice given a one-year contract and the contract would then be converted into a permanent contract”, her lawyer says.
But Bajawrhi-Faiz never got that permanent contract. “My client was unable to work for an extended period of time around her pregnancy. She was then told that her contract was not being renewed. There can be no other reason for this than the absence surrounding her pregnancy. That should not be a reason not to renew a contract; that is pregnancy discrimination”, the woman’s lawyer said.
Ambulatory function
The reason for dismissal that WijEindhoven gave was therefore not very convincing, according to Meevis. “The reason for dismissal would be that she was ‘not often in the office’. A remarkable reason because she has an outpatient position; her work mainly takes place outside the office”.
No complaints procedure
In addition, there is dissatisfaction surrounding the complaints procedure at Bajawrhi-Faiz. “My client first raised her dissatisfaction with the management, who referred her to a confidential counselor, who then said that there was no complaints procedure. We also had the feeling that the confidential counselor’s loyalty lay mainly with the management. We are not satisfied with that either”.
Response WijEindhoven
WijEindhoven informs Studio040 that it is true that there is a dispute with the employee, and that the organisation indeed has a different view. The organisation did not yet want to elaborate on what that view is. “That doesn’t seem useful to me if the case has not yet been served. If there has been a ruling, we would like to explain some things”, a spokesperson said.
Source: Studio040
Translated by: Bob
