The protection of flexible workers has remained a key political priority in the Netherlands for several years. On 12 May 2026, the Dutch House of Representatives adopted the proposed More Security for Flexible Workers Act, including a series of amendments aimed at further strengthening workers’ rights. If enacted, these changes are expected to have a significant impact on employers’ use of flexible labour arrangements.

The proposed legislation introduces measures that, on the one hand, impose stricter rules, but on the other hand consider the practical realities for employers.

One notable example is the ‘interruption period’ under the Dutch rules on successive fixed-term contracts (the so-called ‘chain rule’). Under these rules, multiple fixed-term employment agreements between the same employer and employee are treated as part of one chain of contracts. Once an employee has been employed under more than three successive fixed-term contracts or for more than 36 months in total, their most recent fixed-term contract will automatically convert into a permanent employment agreement.

Under the proposed reforms, the reflection period would also be extended from the current 6 months to 36 months (three years), rather than the originally proposed five years. This means that a new fixed term agreement would only fall outside the previous chain (and therefore start a new chain) if more than 36 months have passed since the end of the last fixed term agreement. The aim is to prevent so-called ‘revolving door’ arrangements, while avoiding unnecessary administrative burdens on employers.

The legislation also recognises that flexible working arrangements may still be appropriate in certain circumstances. Under the proposed reforms, certain exceptions will continue to apply to work performed by students and school pupils in side jobs. The reforms also clarify when such work can still qualify as a side job. In particular, where working hours exceed 16 per week, this will no longer be the case and the full protections and obligations applicable to standard employment will apply.

Under the reforms there is also scope for tailored solutions for other specific groups of workers. For example, individuals who have reached state pension age will continue to be allowed to work on a zero-hours basis.

The legislation also makes specific provision for more vulnerable groups, such as employees in sheltered employment schemes. Where appropriate, certain flexible working rules may be adapted for these groups. However, these adjustments are only permitted within defined limits and must be supported by additional safeguards to ensure that any flexibility does not undermine their employment protections.

The rules governing agency workers will also be tightened. The proposed reforms would introduce a maximum hiring period of 36 months for agency workers. Also, the principle that agency workers are entitled to employment conditions at least equivalent to employees who are directly employed will be reinforced, and the scope for deviating from this through collective agreements will be further restricted. In addition, protection during illness will be strengthened and agency workers will, in principle, remain entitled to pay even where an agency clause applies.

For more information on the reforms affecting agency workers and a recent District Court case, please refer to this article.

• TheMore Security for Flexible Workers Act marks a shift towards greater security for employees and less scope for long-term flexible arrangements in the Netherlands.
• Employers using flexible labour arrangements should review their current contract structures and workforce models in light of the proposed reforms.
• Businesses relying on successive fixed-term contracts may need to reassess their approach given the revised 36-month reflection period.
• Employers engaging students, school pupils and agency workers should monitor the proposed changes closely, particularly where existing arrangements rely on sector-specific exceptions or collective agreements.
• Organisations using agency workers may face increased compliance obligations and reduced flexibility in relation to employment conditions and sickness protection.