In practice, CBA no. 32bis determines what happens to employees, employment contracts, working conditions, certain employment-related liabilities and existing employment debts at the time of transfer, subject to the limits and exceptions under the applicable rules, and information and consultation duties. We turn the Belgian rules on transfer of undertakings into a practical roadmap for your deal, your timing, your documentation, and your communications. No fluff.
Under Belgian employment law, CBA no. 32bis protects employees’ rights when there is a change of employer as a result of a transfer of an undertaking, or part of an undertaking, by agreement, provided that the economic entity retains its identity after the transfer.
You are likely in CBA no. 32bis territory if:
The key question is not only how the transaction is structured. What matters is whether there is a change of employer and whether an organized economic entity continues in a recognizable way after the transfer.
We combine deep Belgian employment and social law knowledge with practical experience. We assist the transferor, the transferee, HR teams, management, and headquarters with:
At HR Legal, you do not get a 40-page memo with abstract theory. You get a practical plan, a tailored risk overview, clear documents, and legal support you can actually use before, during, and after the transfer.
Hiring employees in Belgium is not just a matter of agreeing on a salary and a start date. Belgian employment law is highly structured, and the type of employment contract you choose determines important rights and obligations for both the employer and the employee. For companies expanding into Belgium —
Doing business in Belgium comes with an entirely different set of employment rules than in many other countries. While Belgian law offers a high degree of worker protection, it also imposes specific, sometimes strict, obligations on employers — including foreign companies with Belgian staff. Here are five key points every
In an interesting decision by the Court of Cassation of 2 February 2025, the Court rules on the implications of a bonusplan (wrongfully) drafted in English. The case involved an employee who, after termination, claimed payment of a bonus based on the company’s bonus plan. The bonus plan was however