5 key document excerpts and issues for verification
This page presents anonymized document excerpts and issues requiring verification. The full documents are not public. Personal data, signatures, account numbers and internal identifiers have been omitted.
The five points below concern Worker 1. Worker 2’s evidence index and timeline are separate.
1. Process-verbaal of 12 March 2024
een berekening van het sinds 6 mei 2022 verschuldigde bruto loon
What it specifically supports: Intrixo had to provide the worker's representative, within two weeks, with a calculation of gross wages due since 6 May 2022. This was not a general obligation imposed on both parties.
2. NBBU Fase 4 agreement — 32-hour guarantee
Terminology: NBBU Fase 4 is equivalent to ABU Phase C. The remainder of the report uses only “Fase 4”.
arbeidsovereenkomst voor onbepaalde tijd · 32 uur per week · geen oproepovereenkomst
What it specifically supports: an indefinite-term agreement, 32 hours per week and no on-call contract. The excerpt reproduces relevant fields only; party details and signatures remain non-public.
3. Example field from a payslip
Contracturen: 1:00 uur per week
What it specifically supports: some payslips state one contractual hour per week although the agreement records 32 hours. The field alone does not determine the amount of a claim, but it requires an explanation of payroll-data and correction history.
4. Register of missing or late payslips and weeks
The table reflects the working document inventory. “Missing” means that a confirmed complete payslip was not present in the analysed package; it does not assert that the document never existed.
| Year | Weeks requiring completion or confirmation | Public status |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | W37, W38, W39, W48, W49 | no complete confirmed set in the working register |
| 2023 | W13, W16, W31–W36, W38, W42–W46 | missing or incompletely represented; comparison with full payroll administration required |
| 2024 | W02, W23 | completion or unambiguous document allocation required |
| 2025 | W32 | received later and must be incorporated into the full account |
What the register supports: the state of the analyzed package and weeks requiring completion or allocation. It does not establish that an absent document never existed.
5. Official Raad van Discipline decision
het verzet gegrond · klachtonderdelen a) en d) gegrond · maatregel van berisping
What the operative part specifically supports: the objection was upheld, the chair's earlier decision was set aside, complaint parts a) and d) were upheld, b) and c) were dismissed, and a reprimand was imposed. The decision also ordered reimbursement of the EUR 50 filing fee to the complainant and EUR 1,250 in costs to the Dutch Bar.
The official anonymized decision is publicly available at Tuchtrecht — ECLI:NL:TADRSGR:2026:166. The authors' own source copy remains private. Publication of the Raad van Discipline decision does not by itself establish the outcome of any later appeal to the Hof van Discipline or finality.
Appeal information — 3 October 2026: According to the authors, the first representative lodged an appeal with the Hof van Discipline. The current outcome of the appeal has not been independently confirmed. Publication of the decision does not itself establish that it is final.
Control table: claim — document — date — exact support
| Claim | Document | Date | What it specifically supports |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intrixo had to calculate gross wages from 6 May 2022 | E-001 · process-verbaal | 12 March 2024 | the specific obligation and starting date of the accounting period |
| The agreement provided 32 hours per week | E-003 · Fase 4 agreement | from 21 November 2022 | indefinite term, 32 weekly hours and no on-call agreement |
| Some payslips state one hour | E-004 · payslips | during the agreement | the Contracturen discrepancy against agreement data |
| The package has gaps and late documents | E-005 · payslip register and correspondence | 2022–2025 | weeks requiring completion, allocation or version control |
| Part of the disciplinary complaint was upheld | E-014 · Raad van Discipline decision | 29 June 2026 | upheld objection, upheld parts a) and d), and reprimand |