No, said Jaap van Engelenburg (63) when the talks were over. He chose not to look at the Dom Tower for the past two years. He looked away, not looking up to see how the restoration was progressing. “It hurts too much,” he said.
The reason is, the Dom Tower has been the center of his life for a long time. Well, the Dom Tower and seven other church towers in Utrecht, which he has been responsible for as senior technical manager since 2012. He did maintenance, but also thought about guided tours and made contact with the carillonneurs who played the carillons and with the Bellringers’ Guild who rang the bells. “I always feel lucky.”
Completed by the author
Rik Kuiper is a regional reporter de Volkskrant in the provinces of Utrecht and Flevoland.
Until two years ago, he was embroiled in a Kafkaesque labor dispute with his employer, the Utrecht city government. They first removed him from the core team responsible for the restoration of the Dom Tower and then attempted to fire him through deception, including by accusing him – apparently falsely – of theft and threats.
Van Engelenburg was devastated, but refused to accept such a dishonorable departure. This week a subdistrict court judge proved him right. That one tried in a highly critical assessment that the city government of Utrecht should not fire the tower manager and should even allow him to return to his old position.
With straight legs
The ordeal began in the fall of 2022, while talking with the core team about the roof hook at the top of the Dom Tower. The architect didn’t like it and wanted to get rid of it, Van Engelenburg deemed it necessary so that workers could work safely. He became angry and spoke in a raised voice. He later apologized for it.
But he received a phone call shortly afterward: he was immediately removed from the restoration. “Because I had a negative influence on the project,” he said at his kitchen table in Oud-Zuilen. ‘I completely lost my balance.’
The city did so ‘with grace,’ a subdistrict court judge ruled this week. No investigation was conducted, no conversation was had and Van Engelenburg was not heard from. Van Engelenburg called the course of events ‘confusing’.
‘I will fight until my last breath’
After being removed from the project, Van Engelenburg admitted to being sick. ‘My world went black. I’ve always been there for everyone, but now I don’t want to get out of bed.’ The doctor prescribed a sedative. ‘I’m depressed.’
What happened next was a reintegration full of challenges. For example, the city ‘structurally’ ignored the company doctor’s advice, according to the district court judge. The city government also did not listen to UWV’s warnings.
Meanwhile, the city accused Van Engelenburg of using ‘threatening language’ during a meeting. According to the city government, he made statements such as ‘I do not agree’ and ‘I will fight until my last breath’. From the ruling: ‘This matter escaped the subdistrict court judge’s threats regarding this matter.’
The tower management also received an official warning. Then he admitted he was sick again.
crowbar
In the spring of 2024, everything went wrong. After almost a year, Van Engelenburg was allowed to remove his belongings from the building where the restoration team was based, a monumental mansion right next to the Dom Tower. He also wants to take pieces of stone from the tower, pieces he’s picked up from the rubble over the years – ‘with the contractor’s permission’, he says.
He was banned, after which he called the project leader who knew about his collection a ‘special tailor’. He also said something like ‘fuck’ or ‘fuck’.
Because he ended up taking the stones with him, the city decided that this was a case of theft. Van Engelenburg was also said to have threatened him with a crowbar that he would take it that day, but he himself denied this. “I was born left-handed,” he said, “and it was in my right hand, the tip pointing toward the ground. How ridiculous. They want to trap me.’
The District Court judge also considered that the threat with the crowbar was not proven. Nothing in the statement indicates that Van Engelenburg explicitly threatened to hit or raised a crowbar to hit. He was holding a crowbar while the argument was going on.’ According to the judge, there was no theft either.
Culture of fear
How could this problem get out of control? Van Engelenburg couldn’t provide an answer. He had no explanation for what happened to him. He said that two other colleagues had also been expelled. “I was the only one against it.” He talks about a culture of fear.
The Utrecht city government also did not provide an answer. A spokesperson referred to that letter that the mayor and council members sent to the city council this week. In it, the board stated that it wanted to do justice to the judge’s decision ‘as quickly as possible’ and ensure that the employee could return to work fully. The council also pledged to ‘critically examine its own actions’.
“I will approach the discussion with an open mind,” Van Engelenburg said. ‘If both sides want to reach an agreement, it has to work.’
And oh yes, since the verdict was handed down, he has also returned to visit the Dom Tower, where the last stone replacement was restored this week. He still hopes to receive an invitation to the official opening with Queen Maxima on Saturday, November 9. So far he has not received it.
‘Going back may be difficult’
According to Evert Verhulp, professor of employment law at the University of Amsterdam, the fact that Van Engelenburg cannot be dismissed does not mean he will automatically return to his role as Dom Tower manager. ‘The employment contract will probably remain in force, because the municipality is a large organization, where men can also work elsewhere. It may be difficult to return to work at Dom Towers if the manager who caused the conflict still works there.’
The fact that the judge in the cathedral tower management case ruled that the city must reimburse legal costs is extraordinary. “These costs are typically only reimbursed if the employer acted truly negligently,” explains Verhulp. ‘Employers generally heed UWV advice on reintegration. Especially the city government, which is generally known as a cautious businessman. The fact that the judge ruled that the costs in the case of the cathedral spire management should be reimbursed shows that the employer was not careful enough.’
According to Verhulp, labor disputes involving forced termination of employment contracts often occur. According to Verhulp, it is difficult to say how many disputes are resolved in court, as not all cases are made public. In most cases, an agreement is also made: for example, the employee and employer jointly agree on a transition payment.
Bente Jaeger
