Booking.com Takes Works Council to Court Over Mandatory Office Days

2026-10-06 community

Amsterdam, Tuesday, 6 October 2026.
In a landmark case, Booking.com is suing its works council to mandate two office days weekly, testing the legal boundaries of remote work rights for thousands of tech employees.

The Legal Battleground in Amsterdam

On Tuesday, October 6, 2026, travel technology giant Booking.com Holding BV and its Amsterdam-based works council (ondernemingsraad) faced each other in the Amsterdam District Court [2][3][8]. This high-stakes legal dispute centers on the travel giant’s attempt to mandate that its 7,000 head office employees work from the Amsterdam office for at least two days a week [1][3][8]. (Note: Dutch news outlet NU.nl reported the company is seeking a three-day mandate [2], while other sources and the official filings point to a minimum of two days [1][3][8]). The works council has consistently refused to sign off on this policy change, arguing that the executive board has failed to present a solid business case to justify compelling physical attendance [1][5][8].

The Friction Between Recommendation and Mandate

Following the lifting of coronavirus lockdowns in 2022, Booking.com introduced a guideline recommending that employees spend 40% of their working hours—equivalent to two days a week—in the office [1][8]. However, because this policy was framed as a recommendation rather than a strict requirement, many employees continued to work almost entirely from home [1][2][3]. Booking.com argues that this lack of structured physical presence has fragmented teams, as employees frequently come in on different days, ultimately harming collaboration, teambuilding, and overall productivity [1][2][3]. Under the newly proposed rules, the company seeks to implement a structured model where one office day is selected by the team and manager, and the second day is chosen individually by the employee [1][5][8].

Market Pressures and Financial Stakes

The corporate push for a mandatory return comes at a time of intensifying market pressure. Booking.com’s management has highlighted that growing competition, particularly from traditional rivals and rapid developments in artificial intelligence (AI), necessitates tighter internal collaboration and faster innovation cycles [2][3]. Despite these commercial pressures, the works council maintains its veto, forcing the company to petition the court for substitute permission to bypass the council’s rejection [8]. This corporate tension unfolds against a backdrop of strong financial performance; Booking.com’s parent company, US-based Booking Holdings, reported a revenue of €19 billion (a nearly 10% annual increase) and a net profit of €6.3 billion (a 5% increase) for the previous year [8]. This places the previous year’s net profit at approximately €6 billion [8].

Dutch Labor Law and the Power of Works Councils

Under the Dutch Works Councils Act (Wet op de ondernemingsraden, or WOR), any significant changes to employee working conditions require the explicit consent of the company’s works council [2][3][8]. Legal experts point out that recent Dutch jurisprudence has increasingly classified remote and hybrid working arrangements as part of these protected working conditions [2][3][8]. Specifically, a landmark 2025 ruling by an Amsterdam subdistrict court sided with a works council when an electronics firm attempted to increase mandatory office days from two to three [3]. In that case, the judge ruled that employee interests—such as work-life balance and commuting costs—outweighed the employer’s generalized productivity arguments [3].

The Concept of Acquired Rights

This legal framework introduces the concept of “acquired rights” (verworven rechten) [8]. According to Niels van der Neut, an assistant professor of labor law at the University of Amsterdam, if employees have been permitted to work entirely or mostly from home for several consecutive years, this flexibility can legally transition into an established employment condition rather than a temporary privilege [8]. The court’s evaluation on October 6, 2026, will heavily weigh whether Booking.com’s executive decision to formalize the two-day office mandate is “reasonable” and whether the works council’s refusal to consent was unjustified [2][8].

A Precedent for the Hybrid Work Era

The outcome of this case is being watched closely by innovation managers and corporate employers across the Netherlands [GPT]. While the employers’ association AWVN has argued that the 2025 ruling was an isolated case and does not alter the general principle that employers retain organizational control, a victory for Booking.com could establish a clear pathway for companies to gradually tighten remote work policies [3]. Conversely, a ruling in favor of the works council would solidify the legal standing of hybrid work as an enforceable right under Dutch law [3][8]. With the Amsterdam District Court expected to deliver its ruling in three weeks [2], the tech sector eagerly awaits a decision that will redefine the boundaries of executive authority and employee autonomy in the post-pandemic era [GPT].

Bronnen

hybrid work works council