Sick Leave Fraud

Peter leads an installation company with 34 employees. He has fought hard for the culture in his company: people who stand up for each other, who take pride in their work. Until Rick called in sick six months ago.

In the beginning there was understanding. Rick had back problems; the occupational health physician confirmed he was unfit for work. But after four weeks the whispering started. Colleagues spotted his car at a handyman business nearby. Someone recognised him in a Marktplaats listing photo for a painting job. And last week a mechanic sent a fully confidential screenshot: Rick working on a roofing project two cities away.

Peter calls in HR. The HR adviser is clear: “We cannot fire him on the basis of rumours and screenshots. We need objective verification. Otherwise we risk a salary sanction or worse.” Peter clenches his jaw. He knows she is right. But in the meantime the company pays his salary every month, and his team is not in a good place.

It is not even primarily about the money, although three thousand euros a month is not nothing. It is about what it does to his people. “Why him and not us?” is the question he reads in the eyes of his technicians. Every day this continues, it undermines his authority and the team culture he has spent years building.

He engages an investigation firm for surveillance. Not to catch Rick out. But to gain clarity. If Rick truly is working while registered as sick, Peter wants a legally admissible dossier. If he himself is wrong, he wants to know that too — and find peace of mind.

What makes the difference

Without documentation the employer is legally weak. With objective observation and documentation, a dossier is created that holds up at the subdistrict court.

Financial context

Long-term absenteeism costs \u20AC3,000 per month in continued salary payment, excluding productivity loss, replacement costs and team demotivation.