From manager to franchisee

It regularly happens that branch managers are invited to franchise the branch where they work. This offers opportunities, but can also entail all kinds of unforeseen risks due to the transition.

Labor law first and foremost requires that the employment contract be terminated in a careful manner. According to case law, the employer/prospective franchisor must carefully investigate whether the company manager is sufficiently informed and actually wants to give up his protection under employment law and social insurance law. It is recommended that this voluntary choice and the process leading up to it also be recorded in writing. It is also important to take plenty of time for this. In addition, self-employment should not be anticipated before all agreements have been signed.

The (additional) due care to be observed is partly due to the fact that the employee is generally in a dependent position vis-à-vis the employer/franchisor. If this process is not supervised with sufficient care, there is a risk that the termination of the employment contract may subsequently be regarded as invalid due to the lack of a will aimed at actual self-employment and/or abuse of circumstances. The employee must therefore not be lightly “tempted” into self-employment.
Also, after the choice for self-employment, something actually needs to change in the relationship. In the event of such a transition, it will have to be critically examined whether the tax authorities and the UWV have indeed started to regard the former employee as a self-employed person. To this end, it is important that the case is submitted to the aforementioned authorities in advance and that a VAR statement (WUO) is requested in good time.

Particular attention is also required when providing, or withholding, any forecasts. In some cases, forecasts are omitted on the assumption that the manager is well informed. However, that need not always be the case. After all, the question arises whether the manager has had insight into cost structures in a franchise relationship. It is therefore recommended to state explicitly why forecasts are not made. By acting in this way, the requirement of informed consent, which should be the basis for termination of the employment contract, will also be met more quickly.

This can lay the foundation for a successful franchise relationship, which will be experienced as a promotion.

Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice

Other messages

The Supreme Court sets strict requirements for franchise forecasts

A ruling by the Supreme Court on Friday casts a new light on the provision of profit and turnover forecasts to aspiring franchisees.

By Ludwig en van Dam|28-02-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , , |

Infringement of exclusive service area by franchisor in connection with formula change dated February 27, 2017

On 30 January 2017, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Noord-Holland, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2017:688 (Intertoys/franchisee), was asked how to deal with the

By Alex Dolphijn|27-02-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

Forecasts at startup franchise formula

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled on 14 February 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:455 (Tot Straks/franchisee) on the question whether the franchisor had provided an unsatisfactory prognosis and whether the

Mandatory transfer of franchise business to franchisor?

On January 23, 2017, the District Court of Amsterdam, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:412 (CoffeeCompany/Dam Spirit BV) rendered a judgment on the question whether a franchisee upon termination of the cooperation

Transfer customer data to franchisor

In its judgment of 10 January 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:68 (OnlineAccountants.nl), the Amsterdam Court ruled, among other things, on the question of how customer data should be transferred.

Franchise Closing Sale – Who Gets the Sale Proceeds?

The judgment of the District Court of the Northern Netherlands dated 12 October 2016, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2016:5061 (Administrator/Expert Group and Rabobank), focused on the question whether the franchisor, together with the bank,

By Alex Dolphijn|10-02-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |
Go to Top