FNV & CNV v Temper – Amsterdam Court of Appeal, 16.06.2026 ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2026:1612

Temper operates a digital platform through which businesses offer temporary assignments and workers apply to perform them. The work commonly includes activities in hospitality, retail and logistics.

Temper described the workers as independent entrepreneurs and presented itself as a platform facilitating agreements between workers and clients.

FNV and CNV argued that Temper effectively supplied workers to clients and should be treated as their temporary-employment agency. The Amsterdam District Court rejected that argument in 2024, after which the trade unions appealed.

Article 7:690 BW concerns an employment contract under which an employer makes a worker available to a third party, as part of its business, to perform work under that third party’s supervision and direction.

The Court also applied the Deliveroo framework. This requires all circumstances to be considered together, including personal performance, remuneration, authority, organisational integration, commercial risk and genuine entrepreneurship.

The Court found that Temper was closely involved in establishing and organising the working relationship. Temper provided the user agreements, model assignment agreements and replacement arrangements used through the platform.

Temper controlled access to assignments, imposed platform and quality requirements, and could exclude workers from the platform. It also played an important role in the remuneration and payment structure. Although clients entered the hourly rate, Temper restricted rates below the minimum wage, displayed comparable regional rates and facilitated payment through Finqle.

The assignments formed part of the clients’ normal business activities. Clients determined working times and provided instructions during the assignments.

The Court also considered that workers generally performed assignments personally, bore limited commercial risk and showed insufficient substantive entrepreneurship. Formal registration with the Chamber of Commerce or for VAT did not outweigh the practical circumstances.

The Court of Appeal reversed the District Court and declared that the relationships between Temper and workers performing assignments through the platform qualified as temporary-agency agreements under Article 7:690 BW.

The Court also held that Temper had violated Article 9 Waadi between 1 January 2016 and 1 April 2019 by charging workers €1 for each hour worked in connection with its labour-supply activities.

Not every claim made by FNV and CNV was granted. In particular, claims seeking to establish the clients’ liability could not be awarded against clients who were not parties to the proceedings.