Trusq

factual analysis · traceable to primary sources

Explainer

Works councils and AI: when employee representatives must agree

Adopted 2026-06-21 ยท ≈ 2 min read ยท Dirk Baaijen

AI systems for staff often trigger works-council consent rights. The Dutch Works Councils Act requires consent for staff-monitoring and appraisal systems; the AI Act additionally requires informing workers and their representatives. Rolling out without the works council is a real risk.

Short answer: Introducing an AI system for staff is rarely a management decision alone. In the Netherlands the Works Councils Act (WOR) gives the works council a consent right for arrangements on staff appraisal, monitoring and the processing of personal data โ€” exactly what HR AI does. The AI Act adds an information duty. Skip the works council and you risk the decision being void.

Article 27 WOR requires works-council consent to adopt, change or withdraw, among others, arrangements concerning:

  • staff appraisal;
  • facilities aimed at observing or monitoring the attendance, behaviour or performance of workers;
  • the processing and protection of staff personal data.

A CV-screening tool, a performance dashboard or a monitoring system almost always falls under one of these. Without consent (or substitute permission from a court) the decision is void โ€” the employer may not implement it.

What the AI Act adds

The AI Act governs not consent but information. Article 26 requires the deployer to inform workers and their representatives before a high-risk system is put into use on the work floor. The two tracks reinforce each other: the WOR decides whether it is allowed, the AI Act ensures the council gets the information to judge.

The GDPR alongside

Article 88 GDPR leaves room for national and collective rules on data processing in the employment context. In practice a DPIA (data protection impact assessment) and the works-council process often run together: the same risks, two bodies.

How to do it well

  • Involve the works council early โ€” not at rollout, but at the choice of system.
  • Supply the AI Act information (purpose, operation, human oversight, effects on workers) as the basis for the consent request.
  • Combine with the DPIA so privacy and co-determination questions meet in one assessment.
  • Record the agreements โ€” for example on review, bias monitoring and the right to human checking.

What to do

  • Test every HR AI system against Article 27 WOR before introduction.
  • Plan the works-council process in parallel with procurement, not after.
  • Document both consent and the information provided โ€” both can be reviewed later.

Co-determination is not a formality at the end but a condition at the start. The employer who brings the works council along avoids a legally void decision and builds support for the AI it wants to use.

Sources

  1. https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002747
    Dutch Works Councils Act (WOR), Art. 27: consent right for arrangements on staff appraisal, monitoring and processing of personal data.
  2. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
    Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act), Art. 26: deployers inform workers and their representatives before putting a high-risk system into use.

Share on LinkedIn

Read next

A

AI productivity scoring and bossware: what may an employer do?

Continuous AI monitoring and performance scoring ("bossware") collides with GDPR proportionality, purpose limitation and transparency, with good employership and with the works council's consent right. Covert or all-encompassing measurement is not allowed.

A

DPIA for HR AI: when is it mandatory and how do you combine it with the FRIA?

A DPIA (Art. 35 GDPR) is mandatory for large-scale, systematic monitoring and for high-risk AI in HR. This article explains what it must contain and how to combine the DPIA with the FRIA (fundamental rights assessment, Art. 27 AI Act) into one process. With a practical step plan.

W

Post-market monitoring (Article 72) after deployment

Article 72 of the AI Act requires providers of high-risk AI to keep actively monitoring systems after deployment. A post-market monitoring system collects and analyses performance data throughout the lifetime and feeds risk management. Compliance does not end at market launch.

Dirk Baaijen

About this knowledge base

Compiled and maintained by YRproject โ€” programme and project direction at the intersection of digital transformation, AI and regulation. Every factual claim is traceable to its primary source. YRproject is led by Dirk Baaijen About & method โ†’

A project or programme? Work with YRproject โ†’

The monthly briefing

AI regulation in five minutes: what changed, what is coming and what it means. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.

Your address is used for this only and stored on our own servers.