Are searches in ChatGPT on a work laptop grounds for dismissal?

Firing an employee on the spot for using ChatGPT on a work laptop? That might sound harsh, but legally, it’s not that simple. And that’s exactly where things went wrong in this case.

In this ruling by the Zeeland-West-Brabant District Court, the case involved an employee on sick leave who had, among other things, entered search queries via ChatGPT on his company laptop regarding dismissal and potential severance pay. The employer, along with other allegations, saw this as grounds for immediate dismissal. But the district court judge drew a clear line through that.

Why? Because private use of the laptop was apparently not prohibited. The employer had not indicated anywhere that this was prohibited, so the labor court judge assumed that private use of the laptop was permitted. The use of ChatGPT was therefore not automatically a misuse of company resources. Nor was it shown that confidential company information had been shared. This made this aspect, at most, a minor offense, but not serious enough to warrant immediate dismissal. 

The most important lesson for employers, however, lies elsewhere. In the termination letter, the employer had listed seven reasons without making it clear that each of those reasons could, on its own, justify immediate termination. Legally, this constitutes a composite cause for immediate termination. Consequently, all seven elements must be proven. That did not happen. As a result, the immediate termination was overturned. Sometimes, therefore, the greatest risk lies not in the behavior itself, but in how the termination letter sets the case in motion.

What can employers learn from this?

1. Formulate the grounds for dismissal very precisely and strategically;
2. make it clear that the behaviors mentioned, both individually and collectively, constitute grounds for immediate dismissal; 
3. do not list too many allegations at once unless each point can be firmly substantiated;
4. clearly define in your policies what is and is not permitted regarding company resources, including for personal use. 

Not sure whether a termination letter, IT policy, or protocol is legally sound? In that case, a quick review beforehand is often more cost-effective than litigation later on. Please feel free to contact Dennis Oud, Tessa Sipkema, Elke Hofman-Bijvank and Noa Bilogrevic, and for more information.