The Netherlands' Wet Meer Zekerheid Flexwerkers: Which Agency Terms Must Be Equivalent

The Netherlands Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers (Act on more security for flexible workers) is set to reshape how employers, hirers and staffing agencies structure flexible work. The legislation is being taken forward as a phased reform package, with different provisions intended to take effect on different commencement dates rather than all at once. This guide is written for HR directors, in-house counsel, staffing agencies and multinational groups with Dutch operations who need a precise, practitioner-oriented understanding of what is proposed and how it fits together.

In short: a central plank of the reform is the amendment of the equal-treatment rule in the Waadi so that agency workers receive terms and conditions that are at least equivalent to those of comparable directly employed staff at the hirer, so employers should begin to audit, compare and reprice their staffing arrangements now.

Note on timing: the Dutch legislative process for these reforms has been subject to change, and the precise commencement dates and final statutory wording depend on the Act as adopted and on the associated commencement decree. Readers should verify the current status and effective dates against the official texts before acting.

Background and scope: the Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers

The Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers is the product of a broader policy drive by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid) to reduce insecurity in flexible employment. Rather than creating an entirely free-standing code, the reform amends several existing statutory instruments. A separate commencement decree is expected to set out precisely which provisions take effect on which date. Reading the Act and the decree together is essential, because the substantive rules and their entry into force are set out in different documents.

What statutes change?

The reforms touch several principal bodies of law. First, the Waadi (Wet allocatie arbeidskrachten door intermediairs, the Act on the allocation of workers by intermediaries), and in particular the equal-treatment provision governing the terms and conditions that hirers must extend to agency workers. Second, the Burgerlijk Wetboek (the Civil Code), Book 7, which contains the chain rule in article 7:668a and the framework for on-call and flexible contracts. Understanding the Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers therefore means tracking amendments across the Waadi and the Civil Code simultaneously.

Who is in scope?

The rules apply across the triangular staffing relationship: the staffing agency (the formal employer), the hirer (the business where the worker performs the work), and the agency worker. Multinational groups deploying temporary labour through Dutch entities are squarely within scope, as are payroll companies and other intermediaries falling within the Waadi definition. Businesses that engage flexible labour through bandwidth or on-call arrangements will also feel the effect of the Civil Code changes, even where no agency is involved.

Commencement timetable, a phased approach

An important operational feature of the Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers reforms is that they are intended to commence in phases rather than in one step. The commencement decree is expected to stagger implementation, and each date carries its own compliance workload. Treating the reforms as a single event is a common and costly misreading; the more accurate mental model is a rolling programme phased over successive dates. Because the exact dates depend on the legislation as finally adopted, employers should confirm the current timetable against the official sources.

Phase one, Waadi equivalent terms

The most immediate change is the extension of the equal-treatment rule in the Waadi. The obligation moves beyond a narrow core of pay-related terms and expands to require at least equivalent “other terms and conditions” for agency workers compared with directly employed staff performing the same or similar work at the hirer. Because this requires comparative benchmarking and repricing, it demands attention first.

Phase two, strike-replacement ban and hirer notice duty

Further protections are expected in a later phase. These include restrictions on using agency workers to replace employees who are taking part in industrial action at the hirer, a strike-replacement ban aimed at the hirer, together with associated notice duties. Employers with a history of using temporary staff to maintain operations during disputes should review their contingency planning well in advance.

Phase three, Civil Code changes: bandwidth contract, on-call definition and the chain-rule gap

A later phase amends the Civil Code. It introduces the bandwidth contract (bandbreedtecontract), revises the statutory framework for the on-call contract (oproepovereenkomst) so that bandwidth arrangements are treated distinctly, and changes the interval that resets the chain rule under article 7:668a. These are structural contractual reforms rather than pure parity measures, and they typically require template redesign and payroll reconfiguration, work that should begin early to be ready for commencement.

Which terms must match the hirer’s, the equivalence breakdown

The heart of the Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers reform is the expanded equal-treatment rule in the Waadi. To apply it correctly, practitioners should distinguish between the terms already covered under the existing regime and the wider category of “other terms and conditions” that must, once the reform is in force, be at least equivalent.

Core terms already covered

The pre-existing text of the Waadi already requires agency workers to receive core employment terms in line with those applicable at the hirer. These traditionally centre on pay and directly related entitlements: the applicable wage, adjustments to that wage, and closely associated pay elements, as well as certain other matters such as working time and rest periods. The starting point for any comparison exercise is therefore to confirm that these core terms are already correctly aligned, because the amended provision builds on this foundation rather than replacing it.

Extended equivalent terms, a category list with examples

Once in force, the equivalence test extends beyond core pay to “at least equivalent other terms and conditions”. While the definitive scope is a matter for the statutory text and its interpretation, practitioners should treat the following categories as squarely in play and benchmark each against the hirer’s arrangements:

• Basic pay. The applicable base wage for comparable work at the hirer.
• Bonuses and variable pay. Performance bonuses, thirteenth-month payments and similar structured awards.
• Allowances. Travel, expense and role-specific allowances available to directly employed staff.
• Shift premiums. Uplifts for evening, night, weekend or irregular-hours working.
• Pension contributions. Access to and the level of pension provision comparable to the hirer’s scheme, subject to the collective-agreement rules discussed below.
• Leave entitlements. Statutory and contractual holiday, and other paid leave available at the hirer.
• Overtime rules. The rate and treatment of hours worked beyond normal working time.
• Training and access to facilities. Access to training, development and workplace amenities on equivalent terms.
• Occupational health and safety provisions. Protective arrangements and health-and-safety measures applied at the hirer.
• Seniority calculations. The way length of service is recognised for entitlements that scale with tenure.
• Scheduling rights. Rostering, predictability and scheduling protections.
• Notice procedures and company benefits. Procedural protections and general benefits offered to comparable staff.

In practice, the equivalence exercise means constructing a line-by-line comparison between what the agency worker receives and what a comparable directly employed colleague at the hirer receives, then identifying and closing any shortfall before commencement.

Agency collective agreements: deviation only if the total package is equivalent

The equivalence framework does not necessarily force a rigid, element-by-element match in every case. The reform contemplates that an agency collective agreement (such as the sector collective agreements applying to temporary work) may deviate from strict term-by-term equivalence, but only where the total package remains at least equivalent overall. This is a critical nuance: a lower figure on one element can, in principle, be offset by a more generous figure elsewhere, provided the aggregate does not fall below the equivalent benchmark. The practical risk is that offsetting is applied loosely; the safer approach is to document the comparison and demonstrate genuine overall equivalence rather than relying on unquantified assertions.

Practical examples: pay parity, pension and allowances

Consider a hirer whose directly employed staff receive a shift premium for night work and a thirteenth-month payment. Once the reform applies, an agency worker performing comparable night work should receive an equivalent premium, and the wider package should reflect the thirteenth-month value or an equivalent offsetting element. On pension, where the hirer offers scheme access and employer contributions, the agency worker’s package should be at least equivalent, subject to any lawful deviation under an agency collective agreement where the total package still measures up. Allowances that are, in substance, part of the reward for comparable work should be extended on an equivalent basis rather than withheld simply because the worker is engaged through an agency.

Bandwidth contract vs on-call vs fixed-term vs agency, comparison and drafting implications

The Civil Code reforms introduce the bandwidth contract and revise the on-call framework, changing the drafting landscape for flexible work. Understanding how these contract types differ is essential to choosing the right instrument and avoiding inadvertent breaches of the equivalence rules.

Bandwidth contract, definition and limits

The bandwidth contract (bandbreedtecontract) is designed to provide workers with a guaranteed minimum number of hours while allowing a defined band of additional hours above that minimum. The instrument aims to give workers greater income predictability than a pure on-call arrangement, while retaining flexibility for the employer within the fixed band. The precise permitted bandwidth is set by the statutory framework, and employers should confirm the applicable cap against the enacted text before designing templates.

On-call framework, how it interacts

The revised on-call framework treats bandwidth contracts distinctly. This matters because on-call arrangements carry their own regulatory obligations, including rules on advance notice of shifts, minimum call-out pay and, after a period, an obligation to offer a fixed number of hours. Mislabelling a bandwidth contract as an on-call contract, or vice versa, could expose an employer to the wrong set of duties. Employers should map each existing flexible arrangement to the correct category.

Drafting pitfalls and recommended clauses

The most common drafting pitfalls will be failing to state a genuine guaranteed minimum, exceeding the permitted bandwidth, and using ambiguous language that leaves it unclear whether a contract is a bandwidth or on-call arrangement. Recommended clause drafting should specify the guaranteed minimum hours, the permitted maximum within the statutory ceiling, the rostering and call-in mechanism, and the pay and benefits parity position where the worker is comparable to directly employed staff. Contracts should also anticipate how the chain rule applies over time.

Impact on rehiring, the chain rule and article 7:668a

The chain rule in article 7:668a of the Civil Code determines when a succession of fixed-term contracts converts into a contract of indefinite duration. The current rule provides that, broadly, more than three consecutive fixed-term contracts, or fixed-term contracts spanning more than a set maximum period, convert into a permanent contract, unless there is a break of a defined length between contracts. The reforms change how the interval between successive contracts operates, which has direct consequences for rehiring decisions and for the equivalence compliance strategy.

Changing the gap that resets the chain

Under the current approach, a break between fixed-term contracts of a defined length (generally more than six months) can reset the chain, allowing employers to start a fresh sequence. The reform proposes to lengthen the interval that resets the chain rule considerably, so that a much longer genuine break would be required before the count begins afresh. This makes it far harder to reset the chain by imposing a short break. Employers should verify the exact interval adopted in the enacted legislation, as the figure has been the subject of legislative debate.

Agency worker treatment

Agency contracts are also drawn more fully within the succession framework, so that longer-term agency engagements will increasingly attract the same consequences as ordinary fixed-term contracts, reducing the ability to keep workers in perpetual temporary status. The reform also tightens the special agency-work regime (the “phase” system under sector collective agreements) so that permanent status is reached sooner. Combined with the equivalence obligations, the reforms narrow the gap, both in cost and in security, between agency and direct engagement.

Practical rehiring scenarios and compliance steps

Consider an employer who previously rehired a former temporary worker after a six-month break to reset the chain. Once the extended interval applies, that same break may no longer reset the count; a substantially longer gap would be required. The employer’s risks include unintended conversion to an indefinite contract and retroactive claims where arrangements are misclassified. Compliance steps include mapping every worker’s contract history, recording start and end dates precisely, tracking cumulative agency service, and taking advice before rehiring anyone whose prior engagement falls within the extended window.

Practical compliance checklist for employers, hirers and agencies

Because the reforms are expected to commence in phases, the compliance programme should be sequenced against the same phases. The following prioritised action list translates the Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers obligations into concrete tasks.

Immediate, the equivalence workstream

• Map the flexible workforce. Identify every agency worker and the hirer, role and comparator for each.
• Audit agency contracts. Review terms against the expanded Waadi equal-treatment categories.
• Compare in-house terms. Build a line-by-line comparison of agency and directly employed packages.
• Reprice master staffing agreements. Adjust commercial terms with agencies to reflect equivalence costs.
• Document total-package equivalence. Where an agency collective agreement deviates, evidence overall equivalence.

Short term, strike-replacement and notice duties

• Review strike contingency plans. Ensure agency staff are not used to replace employees taking industrial action at the hirer.
• Update notice procedures. Build the hirer notice duties into operational processes.
• Train managers. Brief line managers on the strike-replacement ban and its practical scope.

Medium term, Civil Code contract reforms

• Redesign contract templates. Introduce compliant bandwidth contract templates with a genuine minimum and the statutory bandwidth cap.
• Reclassify on-call arrangements. Confirm each contract falls within the revised on-call framework or the bandwidth model.
• Reconfigure payroll and HRIS. Update systems to track guaranteed minimums, maximum bands and chain-rule counting.
• Recalibrate rehiring rules. Apply the extended chain-rule interval and the agency-service thresholds in workforce planning.

Template clause checklist

• Guaranteed minimum hours clearly stated.
• Maximum hours capped within the statutory bandwidth.
• Equivalence provisions on pay, allowances, pension and benefits.
• Rostering, call-in and notice mechanics.
• Chain-rule tracking and rehiring safeguards.

Throughout, employers should consult the works council (ondernemingsraad) or relevant union where required, and update employee communications so that affected staff understand the changes. Practitioners should treat the whole exercise as a rolling programme rather than a single project.

Cross-jurisdiction considerations, the EU Temporary Agency Work Directive and other European approaches

The Dutch reforms sit within a wider European framework. For multinational groups, comparing the Dutch equivalence rules with the EU baseline and neighbouring regimes helps in designing consistent group-wide policies.

EU Directive key points

Directive 2008/104/EC on temporary agency work establishes an equal-treatment principle at EU level: agency workers should, in principle, receive basic working and employment conditions at least as favourable as they would if directly recruited by the user undertaking for the same job. The Directive sets a floor; member states may implement it in ways that go further, including permitting certain derogations through collective agreements.

Netherlands versus the EU baseline

The Dutch equivalence regime builds on and extends the Directive’s equal-treatment idea by broadening the range of terms that must be at least equivalent and by tightening the surrounding contract framework, including the bandwidth contract and the extended chain-rule gap. In other words, the Dutch approach implements the Directive’s principle and layers additional national protections on top.

Implications for multinationals

Groups operating across several European states will encounter a common Directive baseline but divergent national detail. Germany, France and Belgium each implement the equal-treatment principle with their own qualifications and collective-agreement mechanisms, so a policy that is compliant in one jurisdiction may not satisfy the differently structured requirements of another. The practical takeaway is to treat the Dutch equivalence rules as a distinct compliance workstream rather than assuming that group-wide agency policies automatically satisfy them.

Conclusion and next steps

The Wet meer zekerheid flexwerkers reforms are intended as a phased programme that begins with expanded equivalence obligations under the Waadi, adds strike-replacement and notice duties, and restructures flexible contracts and the chain rule under the Civil Code. Employers, hirers and agencies should not wait: the equivalence audit and repricing exercise needs to be well advanced before the first commencement date, and template and payroll redesign should be underway ahead of the later phases. Because the detail turns on the legislation as finally adopted, on statutory interpretation and on how agency collective agreements are applied, these obligations should be implemented with tailored legal advice and against the current official texts.

This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice; readers should seek advice specific to their circumstances before acting.

Sources

1. Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid, policy pages on flexible work reform
2. Wetten.overheid.nl, Burgerlijk Wetboek (Civil Code), Book 7
3. Wetten.overheid.nl, Wet allocatie arbeidskrachten door intermediairs (Waadi)
4. EUR-Lex, Directive 2008/104/EC on Temporary Agency Work
5. Officiële bekendmakingen, Staatsblad (for the Act and commencement decree as published)