TU/e must give job back to CE&C director, judge says

The previous managing director of the Chemical Engineering & Chemistry department was wrongly replaced permanently by TU/e ​​and must get his job back. The court ruling states that TU/e ​​failed to provide sufficient evidence that Mark de Graef was not performing well.

by
photo ARMMY PICCA / Shutterstock

In January, De Graef wanted to resume his work as managing director at the department of Chemical Engineering & Chemistry (CE&E) when he discovered he had been permanently replaced. This occurred before his maximum two-year sick leave period had expired. De Graef disagreed with his employer that he would not be able to return to his position due to perceived underperformance. Therefore, he filed a lawsuit against TU/e, which he has now won.

The judge ruled that the university had not provided sufficient evidence that De Graef was underperforming. The university also failed to sufficiently demonstrate the organizational interest to justify not allowing him to return to the position of managing director. TU/e ​​has been given a month to rectify the situation so that De Graef can resume his old position on October 1. If this does not happen, the university risks a fine.

De Graef has since been succeeded by Sham Moodliar, who has also been given a permanent position. The university now has two managing directors at the same department and will have to find a solution. TU/e spokesperson Ivo Jongsma declined to comment on how exactly he plans to solve this situation. Moodliar was also contacted for comment, but did not respond.

Promise or warning?

It is striking that the ruling refers to a phrase TU/e expressed towards De Graef regarding evidence gathering. "TU/e has already announced that a improvement program will begin immediately for De Graef upon his return, with the possible termination of his employment contract due to poor performance as the outcome."

Judge expressed it was unclear to her whether the university means this as a promise or a warning, but she recommends that the parties "continue to conduct themselves as good employers and good employees, even in these circumstances, which may not be desirable to either party."

The university states that it has taken note of the ruling, according to spokesperson Jongsma. "Due to privacy concerns, we cannot answer questions from personnel files." De Graef's lawyer was unavailable for comment.

Share this article