Schiphol cleaner fired for taking traveler's bag and iPhone loses €30,000 severance suit
A subdistrict court judge in Haarlem has rejected a lawsuit from a 62-year-old cleaner working at Schiphol Airport after he took an airline passenger's bag containing an iPhone, in-ear headphones, and a watch from a terminal in June. The court ruled that his dismissal for cause was justified, effectively throwing out his demand for more than 30,000 euros in severance pay and lost wages, and ordered him to pay more than 900 euros of his former employer's legal costs.
The incident occurred near Departure Hall 2, where the cleaner, employed by a Schiedam company, placed a passenger’s bag in his trash container. The bag’s owner reported the loss immediately to the Koninklijke Marechaussee, the military branch handling certain airport policing tasks. About six weeks later, the items were found at the cleaner’s home using the stolen phone's active “Find My iPhone” feature.
On Wednesday, August 6, the cleaner was arrested by the Marechaussee and held for several hours of questioning. Surveillance footage clearly showed him taking the items home, which the cleaner admitted, but he said it was an inadvertent error of judgment as he thought the bag was left behind by a passenger who wanted to throw it away.
The man wound up missing work as a result of the arrest. The cleaning company was informed of the man's detention, and immediately suspended the worker without pay. A few days later, he was fired. The company said that taking the bag, along with its contents, was simply wrong.
“You should know that it's not permitted to take items home from work in any form whatsoever,” the company wrote to the man about his dismissal, citing the arrest, the resulting unexcused absence, breach of trust, and potential reputational damage. “You should also know that a bag left unattended (temporarily) at a location like Schiphol Airport cannot be considered rubbish, but likely belongs to a passenger or another third party. Your statement that you thought it was waste is highly implausible, given the bag's contents.”
The cleaner contested his dismissal, claiming the items were taken by mistake and describing his absence as a “genuine mistake.” He argued there was no urgent reason for immediate termination and cited his long, “so far flawless employment record.” He also noted the criminal investigation was ongoing and said he could only be found guilty of theft if proven so in court.
The Haarlem subdistrict court disagreed, and sided with the employer’s position that it was unlikely the fired worker thought the item was left as garbage. “[The plaintiff] indicated at the hearing that he took the bag for the specific reason that it was a ‘nice’ bag. It should therefore have been clear to [him] that it was not trash, but customer property,” the judge wrote.
It also considered the fact that that the cleaner made no attempt to return the bag via lost-and-found or management, adding that the employment contract explicitly forbids moving such property to a location outside of the airport. Certainly, staff members and subcontracted workers are not allowed to take lost items home with them, the court ruled.
The judge wrote that the plaintiff was likely aware of these employment conditions, despite his claim that he does not understand the Dutch language. The man was provided training material and documentation in English, the court noted.
