Written by Onur Arslan, employment lawyer at Arslan Advocaten. Registered in the areas-of-law register of the Netherlands Bar for employment law and personal injury. Last updated: 31 August 2026.
How many fixed-term contracts may I be given?
In principle your employer may give you a maximum of three fixed-term contracts within a period of 36 months; on the fourth contract, or as soon as the chain lasts longer than 36 months, a contract for an indefinite period arises by operation of law. That is the core of what the statute calls the chain rule, and it is the rule that most questions about fixed-term contracts ultimately come down to.
The rule is set out in article 7:668a(1) of the Dutch Civil Code and works with two limits that stand side by side. If either is exceeded, the last contract is a permanent contract:
| Limit | What the statute says | When you are permanent |
|---|---|---|
| Number | more than three fixed-term contracts following one another with intervals of no more than six months | from the fourth contract onwards |
| Duration | contracts following one another with intervals of no more than six months and together — those intervals included — exceeding a period of 36 months | from the day on which the 36 months are passed |
Two things here are almost always misunderstood.
First: the intervals count towards the 36 months. The statute counts "those intervals included". If you work for a year, are away for three months, and then work again, that three-month break simply counts in the 36-month total. Employers who glue contracts together with short breaks therefore reach the limit sooner than they think.
Second: no notice or dismissal permit is needed to stop the chain. A fixed-term contract ends by operation of law once the agreed period has expired (article 7:667(1) of the Civil Code). That is exactly why employers often do not give the third extension: the fourth would be permanent, and then ending it suddenly becomes much more complicated.
By way of illustration. An employee at a distribution centre is first given a contract of eight months, then one of a year. There are four months in between in which he does other work, and after that another one-year contract follows. He thinks he only comes close to a permanent contract "at two years". But the four-month interval counts towards the 36 months, because it is shorter than six months. The question is therefore not how many months he actually worked, but how many months lie between the start of the first contract and the end of the last — breaks included. This is an example situation illustrating the rule, not a case of our firm.
Source: articles 7:668a and 7:667 of the Dutch Civil Code, text in force on wetten.overheid.nl.
When does my fixed-term contract automatically become a permanent contract?
As soon as the fourth successive fixed-term employment contract takes effect, or as soon as the chain passes the 36 months, the current contract counts by operation of law as having been entered into for an indefinite period — without you or your employer having to do or sign anything. "By operation of law" means literally: it happens by itself, even if on paper the contract is called "fixed-term" and even if your employer maintains that you are employed temporarily.
That last point is in practice the most important one on this whole page. What the heading of your contract says is not decisive. What is decisive is the arithmetic.
What that means for you in concrete terms once you are permanent:
- Your employer can no longer simply let the employment contract expire. Ending it is then only possible with permission from the UWV, through rescission by the subdistrict court, or by mutual consent in a settlement agreement.
- There must be a reasonable ground for dismissal and redeployment must not be possible (article 7:669 of the Civil Code).
- A notice period applies, and it is calculated from the conclusion of the first contract in the chain (article 7:668a(4) of the Civil Code) — so over your entire employment history, not just over the last contract.
By way of illustration. An administrative assistant signs a fourth contract, again with "fixed-term" in the heading and an end date in it. There was never more than a few weeks between the contracts. As that end date approaches, she is told that the employment "ends by itself". She assumes that is right, because after all that is what it says. But on the fourth successive contract the agreement counts by operation of law as having been entered into for an indefinite period; what the heading says is then not decisive. The question that has to be answered is therefore not what the contract is called, but how the chain counts. This is an example situation illustrating the rule, not a case of our firm.
So if you are told that your "fourth fixed-term contract" is expiring, that is not an ending by operation of law but as a rule an invalid termination of a permanent employment. Anyone who raises that in time is in a strong legal position. Anyone who discovers it only months later runs into forfeiture periods.
What is an interval, and when does the count start again?
The count under the chain rule only starts again after a break of more than six months between two contracts; if the break is six months or shorter, everything simply continues to count. That interruption period is the hinge of the whole system, and at the same time the place where employers most often try to build a construction.
| Situation | Effect on the chain |
|---|---|
| Break of 6 months or shorter | the count continues; moreover the break counts towards the 36 months |
| Break of more than 6 months | the counter goes back to zero; a following contract is "the first" again |
| You return to a different employer who is reasonably the successor of the previous one | the chain continues — successive employership, article 7:668a(2) of the Civil Code |
| Seasonal work in a role designated by collective agreement (a maximum of nine months a year) | the interval can be shortened by collective agreement to no more than three months (paragraph 13) |
Successive employership deserves separate attention, because that is where most of the room is sought. If you go to work at a company through an employment agency and that company then takes you on itself, or your work is taken over by another company, the earlier contracts in principle simply count. Article 7:668a(2) of the Civil Code does not require the new employer to have had insight into your qualities: what matters is whether the employers are reasonably each other’s successors as regards the work performed. In practice this means that a restart of the same business under a new name, or a move from agency to hirer, does not as a rule break the chain.
There are statutory exceptions to the chain rule. The most important:
- A collective agreement may extend it to a maximum of 48 months and a maximum of six contracts, but only if the collective agreement shows that the intrinsic nature of the business operations requires this for those roles (paragraph 5).
- Employees who have reached the state pension age: for them 48 months and six contracts apply by operation of law, with only contracts entered into after reaching that age counting (paragraph 12).
- Employees under eighteen who work an average of no more than twelve hours a week: the chain rule does not apply to them (paragraph 11).
- Vocational training pathway (bbl): contracts connected with it fall outside the rule (paragraph 10).
- The "revolving door" exception in paragraph 3: a contract of no more than three months immediately following a contract of 36 months or longer does not count towards the 36-month limit. It does count towards the counter of three contracts.
That last exception is regularly applied wrongly in practice — as a licence for an "extra quarter" after a long chain. That only works in the very specific situation the statute describes.
How courts deal with successive employership can be seen well in a judgment of the Amsterdam District Court about a museum worker who first gave guided tours through a payrolling company and was then taken on directly for the same work: the subdistrict court applied article 7:668a(2) in conjunction with (1) of the Civil Code and counted the earlier period (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:323). The Amsterdam Court of Appeal stressed in that connection that the statutory text itself contains no limit in duration or number of successive agreements in the case of successive employership (ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2022:1069). Anyone who came to a company through an agency and was then taken on directly is therefore well advised to put the whole history on the table — including the part that took place "at a different employer".
The chain rule changes on 1 January 2028: what does that mean?
A legislative amendment has been adopted that replaces the six-month interruption period with 36 months. That amendment does not yet apply: most parts only enter into force on 1 January 2028. Until that date the six-month interval continues to apply in full. We mention this explicitly, because a great deal of information is now circulating in which the new period is presented as if it already applies. It does not.
The amendment comes from the More Security for Flexible Workers Act, published in the Bulletin of Acts and Decrees (Stb. 2026, 206) after adoption by the Senate on 7 July 2026. What changes in article 7:668a of the Civil Code on 1 January 2028:
| Subject | Now (until 1 January 2028) | From 1 January 2028 |
|---|---|---|
| Number of contracts | more than three is permanent | unchanged: more than three is permanent |
| Maximum duration of the chain | 36 months | unchanged: 36 months |
| Interval after which the count starts again | more than 6 months | more than 36 months |
| Wider collective-agreement arrangement (48 months / six contracts) | possible where the intrinsic nature of the business operations requires it | that extension lapses |
| School and university students working an average of no more than sixteen hours a week | — | for them the interval remains six months |
| Seasonal roles (a maximum of nine months a year) | interval can be shortened to three months by collective agreement | unchanged, still possible |
| State pension age | 48 months / six contracts | unchanged |
The practical effect of that one change is large. The construction in which an employee is "away for a while" for seven months and then starts a fresh chain disappears: anyone who returns to the same employer within three years will simply carry on counting where they left off.
What you should do with this now: if your chain runs on into 2028, have it worked out in good time how your contracts turn out under both regimes. And do not let anyone tell you that the new period already applies — for a contract ending in 2026 or 2027, the six-month period is decisive.
Source: More Security for Flexible Workers Act (Stb. 2026, 206); future text of article 7:668a of the Civil Code on wetten.overheid.nl.
What happens if my contract is tacitly extended?
If you simply carry on working after the end date without anything being agreed, the contract is deemed to have been continued on the old terms for the same period as before, up to a maximum of one year. So you do not fall into a void, and you are not working "without a contract": the statute fills the gap itself. That is set out in article 7:668(4) of the Civil Code.
How that works out in concrete terms:
| Your last contract | The tacit continuation becomes |
|---|---|
| six months | six months, on the same terms |
| one year | one year, on the same terms |
| two years | one year — the statutory maximum |
"On the former terms" means: the same pay, the same job, the same working hours, the same everything. Your employer cannot impose worse terms retroactively because it forgot to extend.
There are two routes along which that tacit continuation arises:
- Your employer has not complied with the duty to notify and you carry on working (paragraph 4(a)). This is the most common situation: nothing has been said, you simply walk in again on Monday.
- It concerned a contract without a calendar date as its end — for instance "for the duration of the project" — and the work is continued without objection (paragraph 4(b)).
The crucial consequence that almost no one takes into account: that tacit extension is a full new fixed-term contract and therefore simply counts in the chain rule. An employer who "accidentally" lets things run on after the third contract may thereby unintentionally have allowed a permanent employment to arise. We see that regularly, and it is one of the strongest positions an employee can end up in.
When is there "continuation without objection"? For that, according to the case law, what matters is whether the employee was entitled, on the basis of the employer’s conduct, to assume that the employment contract was tacitly continued after expiry. If the parties were in fact still negotiating about changed terms shortly before the end date, that conclusion is less readily drawn — but it is not ruled out. In a 2026 judgment of the Limburg District Court the subdistrict court held, despite ongoing negotiations about a change to the employment terms, that the fixed-term employment contract had been continued and that an employment contract therefore still existed (ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2026:4705). That is precisely why this question is rarely obvious: it is decided on what was actually said and done in the weeks around the end date.
Are you carrying on working after the end date and do you want to know where you stand? Then keep your work rosters, hours worked and e-mail traffic from after the end date. That is exactly the evidence it later turns on.
How far in advance must my employer say whether it is extending?
Your employer must tell you in writing, at the latest one month before the end date, whether the contract is being continued and if so on what terms. That duty to notify applies to every fixed-term contract of six months or longer with a fixed end date. That is the core of article 7:668(1) of the Civil Code, and the answer to the frequently asked question "how many months in advance do I have to hear": one month, not two or three.
The duty to notify has two exceptions (paragraph 2):
| Exception | Explanation |
|---|---|
| The contract does not end on a calendar date | for instance "until the project is completed" or "until the sick colleague returns" |
| The contract was entered into for a period shorter than six months | so at exactly six months the duty to notify does apply |
Pay close attention to what the duty to notify is and is not. It is a duty to inform, not protection against dismissal. The employer must give you clarity in good time; it does not have to extend and does not have to explain why it is not doing so. Anyone hoping that a forgotten notification saves the contract will be disappointed: the contract simply ends on the end date. What you do get is money — see the next section.
Two practical points. In writing means in writing: an e-mail or WhatsApp message is as a rule enough, an oral remark in the corridor is not. And the notification must also be given where the employer does extend: it must then also state the terms on which it wishes to continue.
By way of illustration. A warehouse worker with a one-year contract asks in the canteen three weeks before the end date whether he can stay on. His team leader says: "it’ll be fine, we’re extending you." Nothing is put on paper. Two weeks later he hears that it is not going ahead after all. He assumes an oral promise is worth nothing and leaves it at that. Legally, however, two separate questions are at play here: whether the employer notified him in time and in writing — because that had to be at the latest a month before the end date — and whether in addition a promise was made on which he was entitled to rely. The first point stands apart from the question whether not extending was permitted in itself. This is an example situation illustrating the rule, not a case of our firm.
Courts hold firmly to the text of the statute on both points. The Midden-Nederland District Court put it this way: the requirement of a written document contributes to the high degree of clarity intended by the legislature, and "a communication made only orally therefore does not qualify as a notification in accordance with the statute" — certainly not where the parties disagree about what was said in their conversations (ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2020:2224). Equally important: a sentence in the employment contract itself stating that the contract ends on a particular date does not as a rule count as a notification where that same agreement leaves open the possibility of extension. The Hague District Court held that the certainty intended by the notification duty is then precisely lacking: there is no clear and unambiguous notification (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2022:7903). Employers who think "but it says so in the contract" have therefore often not notified at all.
My employer said nothing — what am I entitled to?
If your employer omitted the notification altogether, it owes you a payment equal to one month’s pay; if it notified late, a pro rata payment for the days by which it was late. That is the sanction in article 7:668(3) of the Civil Code, and it is a right that goes unused by thousands of employees every year.
How the calculation works:
- No notification at all → one gross month’s pay.
- Notified two weeks late → roughly half a month’s pay.
- One day late → one day’s pay.
What counts as "pay" for this payment is set out in the Decree on the concept of pay for the notification-period payment and the transition payment. Broadly it concerns the gross hourly wage times the agreed working hours; fixed allowances in principle count, incidental rewards do not.
This is where the pitfall lies, and it is a hard one. The power to claim this payment from the subdistrict court lapses three months after the day on which the duty to notify arose — so three months counted from one month before the end date of your contract (article 7:686a(4)(e) of the Civil Code). A forfeiture period is not a limitation period: it cannot be interrupted and cannot be extended. If you are late, the right is gone, however undisputed the claim may be. In practice this means: after the end of your contract you have about two months left in which to act.
That this period is unrelenting is clear from the way courts apply it: they first establish whether the application was filed within three months of the day on which the duty under article 7:668(1) of the Civil Code arose, and only then turn to the merits (see for instance ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2023:3452).
This payment is moreover separate from the transition payment. You can have both: the notification payment because communication was late, and the transition payment because the employment ended on the employer’s initiative. Employers regularly present it as a choice. It is not.
Can my employer simply decline to extend my contract?
In principle yes: a fixed-term contract ends by operation of law, and your employer does not have to give a reason, does not have to apply for a dismissal permit and does not have to involve a court. For many people that is the most sobering sentence on this page, and it is why "contract not extended" is searched for so often and answered well so rarely.
There is no statutory duty to extend, no right to an explanation and no obligatory "build-up" of reasons. Your employer may decline to extend because there is less work, because it is not satisfied, because it would rather have someone else, or for no reason at all.
But "no reason needed" is not the same as "anything goes". There are limits, and they are more concrete than people think:
| Limit | What is at play then |
|---|---|
| Not extending because of pregnancy, childbirth or maternity | prohibited distinction on grounds of sex (article 7:646 of the Civil Code) |
| Not extending because of religion, race, sexual orientation, disability, age or working hours | prohibited distinction under the equal-treatment legislation |
| Not extending because you invoked a statutory right (leave, pay, safe working conditions) | may conflict with good employership (article 7:611 of the Civil Code) and with the prohibition on detriment |
| Not extending in retaliation for a report or a complaint | may amount to seriously culpable conduct |
| Already four contracts or more than 36 months | there is no fixed-term contract at all any more — see the chain rule |
If the failure to extend turns out to be the result of seriously culpable conduct or omission by the employer, the subdistrict court can, in addition to the transition payment, award fair compensation (article 7:673(9) of the Civil Code). The bar for that is high, but it is not out of reach.
What you can do in practice if you suspect a prohibited reason lies behind it: ask in writing for the reason for not extending. An employer does not have to give it, but the answer — or the absence of one — is evidence later. Gather in addition what you have: the appraisals, the earlier promises, the moment at which you reported something and the moment at which the tone changed. In this type of case that sequence of events is often the strongest argument.
Do I get a transition payment if my contract is not extended?
In principle yes. Even where a fixed-term contract simply expires and the employer does not continue it, a right to a transition payment arises — from the first working day, regardless of how long you were employed. The fact that the contract ends "by itself" makes no difference: what matters is that continuation fails to happen on the employer’s initiative. That is how it is set out in article 7:673(1)(a)(3°) of the Civil Code.
The payment amounts to one third of a month’s salary per year worked, with a proportionate part for a shorter period (article 7:673(2) of the Civil Code). For 2026 a maximum of € 102,000.00 applies, or a year’s salary if that is higher; that amount is adjusted annually on 1 January.
For fixed-term contracts three additional rules matter:
- Earlier contracts count. Contracts that have followed one another with intervals of no more than six months are added together for the calculation of the duration (article 7:673(4)(b) of the Civil Code). Here too the rule on successive employership applies. So anyone who has had three one-year contracts builds up over three years, not one.
- There is an exception that is often deployed. If before the end of your contract a successive contract has already been entered into that can be terminated early and that takes effect after an interval of no more than six months, no transition payment is payable at that moment. If you are offered a new contract that only starts in a few months’ time, look carefully at whether this is in play.
- The forfeiture period is three months. The application to the subdistrict court must be filed within three months of the day on which the employment contract ended (article 7:686a(4)(b) of the Civil Code). This too is a forfeiture period.
The full explanation — calculation, the concept of pay, taxation, what you are left with net and what applies in the case of illness or a settlement agreement — is on our page on the transition payment.
Source: articles 7:673 and 7:686a of the Dutch Civil Code, wetten.overheid.nl.
My contract is not being extended: am I entitled to unemployment benefit?
In principle yes. The expiry of a fixed-term contract is not culpable unemployment, so the main obstacle to an unemployment benefit is precisely the one that does not arise here. Anyone whose contract is expiring therefore need not fear being told they are "at fault" for their unemployment — that reproach arises with summary dismissal and with resigning, not with a contract that ends by operation of law.
Besides that point, the ordinary conditions apply:
| Condition | What it means |
|---|---|
| Weeks requirement | in the last 36 weeks before your unemployment you must have worked at least 26 weeks; the number of hours a week does not matter |
| Loss of hours | you must have lost at least five working hours a week (or, with small contracts, half your hours) |
| Availability | you must be available for work and comply with the duty to apply for jobs |
| Not culpably unemployed | on the expiry of a fixed-term contract in principle not a problem |
If you only meet the weeks requirement, the unemployment benefit lasts three months. If you also meet the years requirement — at least 52 days of pay a year in four of the last five years — the duration is built up on the basis of your employment history.
Two practical points. Apply for unemployment benefit from one week before your last working day and in any event within two weeks of the first day of unemployment; a later application can lead to a lower benefit. And note: the transition payment is in principle not set off against the unemployment benefit by the UWV, because it is not pay over a notice period.
Source: UWV, conditions for an unemployment benefit.
May my contract not be extended because I am pregnant?
No. Not extending because you are pregnant is prohibited distinction on grounds of sex — but the prohibition on termination during pregnancy does not protect you here, because a fixed-term contract ends by operation of law and there is therefore no termination. That distinction is essential and it is exactly where most online information goes wrong.
What does and does not apply:
| Rule | Does it work with an expiring fixed-term contract? |
|---|---|
| Prohibition on termination during pregnancy and maternity leave (article 7:670(2) of the Civil Code) | no — that prohibits giving notice, and ending by operation of law is not giving notice |
| Prohibition on distinction on grounds of sex (article 7:646 of the Civil Code) | yes — distinction on grounds of pregnancy, childbirth and maternity expressly counts as direct distinction |
| Nullity of a clause ending the agreement because of pregnancy (article 7:667(8) of the Civil Code) | yes — such a clause is void |
| Prohibition on distinction when entering into an employment contract | yes — and an extension is the entering into of a new agreement |
So your employer may decline to extend the contract for a neutral reason, but it may not decline to extend it because you are pregnant. The difference lies in the motive, and that is what every case turns on.
Article 7:646(1) of the Civil Code does not mention "not extending" in so many words; it mentions among other things the entering into and the terminating of the employment contract. Courts bring not extending under that without further ado: "The present case, in which the employment contract is not extended, must be brought under that" (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2020:5137, to the same effect ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2024:9801). Where prohibited distinction is established, the sanction is heavy: seriously culpable conduct within the meaning of article 7:673(9) of the Civil Code is, in the case of prohibited distinction between men and women, "present without more", which opens the way to fair compensation (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2026:2077). That there are cases in which this succeeds appears among others from ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2023:7041, in which the subdistrict court found prohibited distinction on grounds of pregnancy.
How you make that motive plausible. In equal-treatment cases a lighter burden of proof applies: under article 7:646(12) of the Civil Code you only have to put forward facts that can give rise to a suspicion of distinction, after which it is up to the employer to prove that it has not acted contrary to the prohibition.
Do not count your chickens too soon. The case law is strict on this point: the mere coincidence of "I reported my pregnancy" and "my contract is not being extended" is as a rule insufficient to establish a suspicion of distinction — additional facts are needed for that (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2026:2077; to similar effect ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2025:2855 and ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2026:3041, in which the applications were dismissed). Those additional facts are therefore exactly what it is about:
- the sequence of events: a promised or prospective extension that comes off the table shortly after you reported your pregnancy;
- positive appraisals or earlier statements about your performance;
- statements by managers about your availability, leave or "how it will work later on";
- the circumstance that colleagues in the same position were extended;
- the question whether the role has, after your departure, been filled by someone else.
Record this as soon as it arises: write down the date and the exact wording, and confirm an oral conversation by e-mail ("following our conversation this morning, in which you said that…"). Such a confirmation is later often the only hard piece of evidence. How much that can be worth is shown by a case before the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal in which a manager explained the reason for not continuing by WhatsApp, saying that the employee had been absent a great deal and that "when you have given birth you also have to be there for your child" (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2024:7584). Such a message is exactly the additional fact that carries a case.
You can in addition ask for an opinion from the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights. That is free of charge and not binding, but an opinion that distinction has been made weighs heavily in the negotiation that follows.
My contract expires during my maternity leave — what now?
Your contract then simply ends on the end date, but your pregnancy and maternity benefit in principle continues: the UWV pays it directly to you after the end of the employment until the end of your leave. So you are not left without income halfway through your leave, even though you are no longer an employee.
The main points:
| Situation | What as a rule happens |
|---|---|
| Contract ends during pregnancy or maternity leave | the WAZO benefit continues until the end of the leave; the UWV pays you directly, usually weekly |
| Contract ends shortly before the leave | you may in principle still be entitled to a pregnancy benefit where the expected or actual date of childbirth falls within ten weeks of the end of the employment |
| Contract ends and the leave is not yet in prospect | you apply for unemployment benefit and apply for the pregnancy benefit later |
| After the end of the maternity leave | you in principle fall back on unemployment benefit, provided you meet the conditions |
Arrange the bank account with the UWV as soon as you know that your contract expires during the leave — payment then transfers from the employer to you, and that is precisely where delays arise. Your employer passes this on with the application; check that this has been done.
And keep the previous section in mind: the fact that your contract expires during the leave does not mean that the reason for not extending cannot be tested.
Source: UWV, end of contract during maternity leave.
What happens if I am ill when my fixed-term contract expires?
Illness does not keep a fixed-term contract alive: it simply ends on the end date. From that moment the UWV takes over with a sickness benefit, as a rule 70% of your daily wage, until a maximum of two years after your first day of illness. Here too the prohibition on termination during illness (article 7:670(1) of the Civil Code) does not help you, for the same reason as with pregnancy: ending by operation of law is not giving notice.
What happens in practice:
- Until the end date your employer continues to pay your wage during illness — by law at least 70%, for a maximum of 104 weeks, with the statutory minimum wage as a floor in the first year (article 7:629(1) of the Civil Code). Your collective agreement may prescribe more.
- If you have been ill for more than six weeks on the end date, your employer must draw up a reintegration report together with you. You need that for your sickness benefit application.
- Your employer must report you as leaving employment while ill to the UWV, at the latest on the last working day.
- From the end date you receive a sickness benefit from the UWV, as a rule 70% of the daily wage, for at most two years after the first day of illness. Absence guidance and reintegration then run through the UWV.
Two things you should not miss. First, so-called after-effect: if you fall ill within four weeks of the end of your employment, a right to a sickness benefit may still exist. Second: the fact that you are ill does not release your employer from the duty to notify or from the transition payment. Both simply continue to apply.
Source: UWV, leaving employment while ill and the sickness benefit; article 7:629 of the Civil Code.
Can I terminate a fixed-term contract early?
Only if there is an early-termination clause in your contract — and that clause must have been agreed in writing and apply to both parties. If it is not there, you cannot in principle terminate early. That is the rule in article 7:667(3) of the Civil Code, and it is the mirror image of the question employers ask when they want to be rid of someone.
Look in your contract for a sentence such as "this agreement may be terminated early by both parties observing the statutory notice period". If it is there, you can terminate with the applicable notice period — for the employee in principle one month, unless agreed otherwise in writing.
If that sentence is not there, these are your routes:
| Route | How it works |
|---|---|
| Mutual consent | you and your employer agree an end date together; put it in writing |
| Rescission by the subdistrict court | possible, but a detour for a contract that is ending anyway |
| Summary resignation by you | only with an urgent cause, for instance structurally unpaid wages; very risky |
| Sitting it out | often the wisest choice with a contract that has only a short time to run |
Why you should not simply walk out. If you terminate when you are not allowed to, you are in principle liable in damages: your employer can claim compensation equal to the wage over the remaining term, or over the notice period that would have applied. And there is a second risk that weighs more heavily: resigning yourself as a rule costs you your right to unemployment benefit, because you are then culpably unemployed. If you do not have a new job lined up, that is almost always the decisive consideration.
If you do have a new job and are tied to a contract without an early-termination clause, a termination by mutual consent is the usual solution. Employers usually cooperate — an employee who wants to leave is rarely a good employee to hold on to.
Can my employer dismiss me during a fixed-term contract?
Your employer too can only terminate a fixed-term contract early if that has been agreed in writing, and even then permission from the UWV or rescission by the subdistrict court is needed. So a fixed-term contract is in fact less flexible for the employer than many people think: it cannot easily get out of it early.
The employer’s options:
| Route | Conditions |
|---|---|
| Termination during the probationary period | only within a valid probationary period, without a notice period |
| Early termination | only with an early-termination clause, and with permission from the UWV (business-economic grounds or long-term illness) |
| Rescission by the subdistrict court | with a reasonable ground under article 7:669(3) of the Civil Code; without an early-termination clause the court can in principle only rescind in limited cases |
| Summary dismissal | only with an urgent cause, given without delay and communicated without delay |
| Mutual consent | a written settlement agreement, with a reflection period of fourteen days |
| Letting the contract expire | the usual route: no reason, no permit, no court |
If you are presented with a settlement agreement, do not sign on the spot. Under article 7:670b(2) of the Civil Code you have the right to dissolve the agreement within fourteen days without giving reasons — three weeks if your employer failed to mention that right in the agreement. With a fixed-term contract there is moreover a risk of its own: if you sign for an end date that lies before the original end date, that can have consequences for your unemployment benefit. What such an agreement should contain and what to look out for can be read on our page on the settlement agreement.
How long may the probationary period be with a fixed-term contract?
With a contract of six months or shorter there may be no probationary period at all; with a contract longer than six months but shorter than two years the probationary period may last no more than one month, and with two years or longer no more than two months. That is set out in article 7:652 of the Civil Code, and any clause conflicting with it is void — so not merely voidable, but legally non-existent.
| Duration of the contract | Maximum probationary period |
|---|---|
| No more than six months | no probationary period permitted |
| Longer than six months, shorter than two years | one month |
| Two years or longer | two months |
| Indefinite period | two months |
| End not set at a calendar date | one month |
In addition:
- The probationary period must have been agreed in writing and be the same for both parties (paragraphs 1 and 2).
- With a successive contract with the same employer no new probationary period can in principle be agreed, unless that new agreement clearly demands different skills or responsibilities of you (paragraph 6(b)).
- The same applies with a successive employer who is reasonably the successor of the previous one (paragraph 6(c)).
Watch out for the "six months and one day" trick. Because with a contract of exactly six months there may be no probationary period, a contract of "six months and one day" is regularly offered in practice, solely to make a probationary period possible. That can work — but it stands or falls with what was actually agreed, and that is a matter of interpretation. In a judgment of the Midden-Nederland District Court the subdistrict court held that the probationary-period clause was void, after interpreting what the parties could reasonably attribute to each other as to the duration of the contract (ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2025:2519). The Zeeland-West-Brabant District Court too had to answer the question whether an agreement had been entered into for six months or for six months and one day, precisely because whether termination with immediate effect was permitted depended on it (ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2024:5825). If you find such a construction in your contract, read all the provisions about duration — not just the probationary-period clause.
Why this matters. If the probationary period is void — for instance a month’s probation in a six-month contract, or a second probationary period on an extension — then a dismissal in that "probationary period" is not a valid dismissal. The contract then in principle simply continues and your employer owes wages over the remaining term. This is one of the most frequently made mistakes in employment contracts, and it regularly costs employers months of pay.
Here too, watch the period: if you want to invoke the nullity of the probationary period and challenge the dismissal, a forfeiture period of two months after the end of the employment contract applies in principle (article 7:686a(4)(a) of the Civil Code).
Dismissed during the probationary period: am I entitled to unemployment benefit?
In principle yes, provided you meet the weeks requirement. A probationary-period dismissal by the employer does not in itself amount to culpable unemployment. The question that then remains is a factual one: did you work at least 26 weeks in the 36 weeks before your unemployment?
For someone who had only just started, that is the heart of the problem. If you came from a period without work, you probably do not meet the weeks requirement and there is no unemployment benefit. If you came from a previous job, those weeks simply count and there is as a rule a right to unemployment benefit.
What you can do in that case:
- Go direct to the UWV, register as a jobseeker and apply for unemployment benefit, even if you are in doubt — a refusal costs you nothing, a late application does.
- If you do not meet the weeks requirement, ask your municipality about social assistance.
- Check whether the probationary period was valid. If it was not, there is no probationary-period dismissal but an unjustified termination — and then your whole position changes.
If you yourself give notice during the probationary period, the position is different: you are then in principle culpably unemployed and no unemployment benefit follows. Do not let yourself be talked into "resigning because it is not a good fit anyway".
May a fixed-term contract contain a non-competition clause?
Only by way of rare exception. A non-competition clause is in principle not valid in a fixed-term contract, unless the employer sets out in writing alongside it that it is necessary because of compelling business or service interests. That is the rule in article 7:653(2) of the Civil Code, and the reasons must be set out with the clause itself — not in a letter sent later and not only in proceedings.
What that means:
- If the reasons are missing, the clause is void: it does not exist.
- If reasons have been given but the interests are not compelling enough, the court can annul the clause in full (paragraph 3(a)).
- Even with a valid clause the court can annul it in whole or in part if it puts you at an unfair disadvantage (paragraph 3(b)).
- If the contract ends or is not continued through seriously culpable conduct by the employer, it cannot derive any rights from the clause (paragraph 4).
A standard clause from a model contract, without tailored reasons, does not as a rule stand. If you are nevertheless held to such a clause — for instance because a new employer receives a letter from your old one — have that assessed before you turn down an offer. The number of invalid non-competition clauses in fixed-term contracts is considerable.
The same applies, incidentally, to a clause on secondary activities: that is void unless it can be justified on an objective ground (article 7:653a of the Civil Code).
What is different with agency work?
With agency work the chain rule only starts to apply once you have performed work in more than 26 weeks, and in that initial period an agency clause can end your agreement as soon as the assignment stops. That is the regime of article 7:691 of the Civil Code, and it is the reason agency workers are in a fundamentally different position from employees with an ordinary fixed-term contract.
The main lines:
| Subject | What the statute provides |
|---|---|
| Chain rule | article 7:668a of the Civil Code only applies once you have performed work in more than 26 weeks (paragraph 1) |
| Agency clause | may be agreed in writing; the agreement then ends by operation of law as soon as the hirer stops the assignment (paragraph 2) |
| Lapse of the agency clause | the clause loses its force as soon as you have performed work in more than 26 weeks (paragraph 3) |
| Extension by collective agreement | the 26-week period can be extended by collective agreement to a maximum of 78 weeks (paragraph 8(a)) |
| Adding up periods | periods following one another with intervals of no more than six months count (paragraph 4) |
In practice the Collective Agreement for Agency Workers fills this in with the familiar phases: phase A lasts 52 weeks worked and is the phase in which the agency clause can be used; then follows phase B with a limited number of fixed-term contracts, and finally phase C, a contract for an indefinite period. Note the word worked: phase A counts in weeks worked, not in calendar weeks, which means phase A can in practice last longer than a year.
Special attention goes to the point where agency work and the chain rule meet: if you are taken on by the hirer itself, that hirer is as a rule a successive employer and your agency period simply counts (article 7:668a(2) of the Civil Code). That is the answer to the frequently asked question about taking an agency worker into employment: the company does not start with a clean slate.
The full explanation of the phases, notice periods, the agency clause and illness during agency work is on our page on agency workers.
My manager had promised an extension — can I hold him to it?
Sometimes yes. If an unconditional promise was made on which you were entitled to rely, your employer can be bound by it — even if the promise was oral and even if the person who made it was formally not authorised to do so. It turns on two questions: was the promise unconditional, and were you entitled to rely on its being made on the employer’s behalf?
In a case before the Midden-Nederland District Court the future of an employee had been discussed over dinner after a trade fair. The subdistrict court held that a binding unconditional promise of an extension for the duration of a year had been made and that the employee was entitled to rely on it — including on the point of the authority of the person who made it (ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2024:2353).
But the bar is high, and most cases fail. The Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal held in 2026 that an employee could not infer a promise from warm words and a handshake at the end of a conversation, because in that same conversation it had been discussed that continuation depended on improvement in his performance: the statements were "insufficiently clear" (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2026:102).
What that means for you. A positive remark, a good appraisal interview or a "we assume you’ll stay" is as a rule not a promise. A concrete statement about duration and terms, without reservation, can be. If you receive such a statement, confirm it by e-mail that same day with the date, the name and the exact wording. That takes two minutes and is afterwards the only thing on which a claim can be built.
I am still working although my contract has expired — what is my status?
You are not working "without a contract": the statute fills that gap itself and assumes a tacit continuation on the old terms, for the same period as the previous contract with a maximum of one year. That is the same rule as above (article 7:668(4) of the Civil Code), but it deserves an answer of its own, because the question "still working after contract expired" is almost always asked out of uncertainty.
Where you then stand:
- You are simply an employee, with a right to pay, continued payment during illness, holiday days and holiday allowance.
- Your employment has continued, so there is no interruption and the chain rule keeps counting.
- That tacit extension is a contract in the chain — and can therefore be the fourth.
- If your employer wants to be rid of you, that has to be done under the rules applying to that new contract: expiry on the new end date, or — if you are by now permanent — through the UWV or the subdistrict court.
What you do in practice: send your employer a short, friendly e-mail in which you establish that you have carried on working since the end date and ask for written confirmation of your terms of employment. If it does not reply, you have a timestamp; if it does reply, you have your contract. Both outcomes are better for you than waiting.
I do not want to extend my contract myself — do I have to say so?
You are not obliged to say that you do not want to extend: the contract ends by operation of law and you do not have to do anything. It is sensible to say so, and there is one thing you should precisely not do — give notice yourself. The duty to notify rests only on the employer; there is no mirror-image duty for the employee.
What to watch out for:
| What you do | Consequence |
|---|---|
| Doing nothing and letting the contract expire | the employment ends on the end date; in principle no culpable unemployment |
| Saying that you do not want to extend, while the employer did want to extend | this can be regarded by the UWV as culpably unemployed — with loss of unemployment benefit as a result |
| Terminating early yourself | culpably unemployed, and without an early-termination clause possibly liable in damages as well |
| Refusing an offered extension | can put your unemployment benefit at risk, certainly with an equivalent offer |
The distinction is subtle but decisive: letting the contract expire is something other than refusing an offered continuation. If you have no new job and your employer offers an extension, do not lightly settle on "no" — first discuss what the consequences for your benefit are.
If you do have a new job, there is little to worry about. Just let it be known properly and in good time: your employer is then no longer obliged to notify, but you keep the door open for a good reference.
What you can do if your contract is not extended: checklist
Most rights around a fixed-term contract are not lost because the case was weak, but because a forfeiture period of two or three months passed unnoticed. This is what you should run through within that period.
Immediately after the message that there will be no extension:
- Put the end date of your contract on paper, and the date on which you received the message.
- Work out whether the notification was in time: at the latest one month before the end date, and in writing.
- Count your contracts: how many were there, and how long did the chain last in total — including the breaks.
- Check whether there is an earlier employer in play who can count as a successive employer (employment agency, business taken over, restart).
- Ask in writing for the reason for not extending if you suspect that pregnancy, illness or a report played a part.
In the weeks that follow:
- Apply for unemployment benefit from a week before your last working day; do not wait.
- Claim the notification payment if notification was late or absent — in writing, with a concrete deadline.
- Claim the transition payment; have it calculated whether earlier contracts count.
- If you are ill on the end date: check whether your employer has reported you as leaving employment while ill and whether there is a reintegration report.
- Do not sign any settlement agreement without someone having looked at it.
Watch these periods:
| Claim | Period |
|---|---|
| Notification payment | three months after the day on which the duty to notify arose (one month before the end date) |
| Transition payment | three months of the day on which the employment contract ended |
| Challenging a probationary-period dismissal or an irregular termination | in principle two months after the end of the employment contract |
These are forfeiture periods. They cannot be interrupted and cannot be extended, and the court cannot get round them. If you are unsure whether you are still in time, have that assessed first — before you undertake anything else.
When do you need a lawyer?
Not every employment contract that is not extended calls for a lawyer, but there are situations in which an hour of someone looking at it makes the difference between nothing and a considerable sum. These are the signs.
| Sign | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| You have had four or more contracts, or worked longer than 36 months | you may already be permanent, and then there is no ending by operation of law |
| There was an employment agency or a business takeover in your employment history | successive employership can change the whole chain |
| You are pregnant, ill or you raised something recently | the motive for not extending can be tested |
| You only heard in the last few weeks | there is then as a rule a notification payment |
| You carried on working after the end date | there may be a tacit extension, and that counts in the chain |
| There is a settlement agreement on the table | your unemployment benefit and your payment are at stake; the reflection period is fourteen days |
| Your contract has a probationary period or a non-competition clause | both are often invalid in fixed-term contracts |
| You were promised an extension that then came off the table | an unconditional promise can be binding |
| You want to leave before the end date yourself | without an early-termination clause you can be liable in damages and lose your unemployment benefit |
| The end date is less than three months behind you | the forfeiture periods are still running — after that they are not |
With us you can have your contract and your situation assessed free of charge. In many cases a ten-minute calculation is enough to see whether there is something to be gained: the number of contracts, the dates and the intervals together determine almost everything.
In brief
| Question | Answer in one line |
|---|---|
| How many fixed-term contracts? | a maximum of three in 36 months; after that permanent |
| When does the count start again? | after a break of more than six months (from 1 January 2028: more than 36 months) |
| How far in advance do I hear? | at the latest one month before the end date, in writing |
| Employer said nothing? | a payment of one month’s pay; claim within three months |
| Carried on working after the end date? | tacitly extended for the same period, a maximum of one year |
| Does there have to be a reason for not extending? | no — except that the reason may not be discriminatory |
| Transition payment on non-extension? | in principle yes, from the first working day |
| Unemployment benefit on an expiring contract? | in principle yes, provided you worked 26 of the last 36 weeks |
| Pregnant or ill? | the contract ends all the same, but the motive can be tested and your benefit continues |
| Terminate early yourself? | only with a written early-termination clause |
| Probationary period in a six-month contract? | not permitted; such a clause is void |
Put your situation to us
Is your contract expiring soon, have you just heard that it will not be extended, or are you unsure whether you actually already have a permanent contract? Put it to us before the periods expire.
Call 070 450 0300 or send your question via arslan.nl/contact. We have offices in The Hague, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Utrecht, Tilburg and Eindhoven, and our firm also speaks Turkish and Polish.
Bring to a first meeting: all your employment contracts with the start and end dates, any notification letter or e-mail, your last payslip and — if there is one — the settlement agreement you have been given. With those documents it is as a rule clear within a short conversation where you stand.