Coca-Cola was allowed to fire manager after controversial deal Bas Smit | RTL News

RTL Z revealed the existence of the multimillion-dollar feud on Saturday, and reported yesterday that it involved the influencers Smit and Van Dam.

It now appears that a lawsuit has also been filed surrounding the manager’s dismissal, in which the woman demanded more than 1.4 million euros in damages and severance payments. In this dismissal case, more details about the controversial multi-million dollar deal are emerging.

Million dollar deal

The 41-year-old woman has worked at Coca-Cola since 2009, where she rose to a senior marketing position. She earned almost 8,900 euros gross per month, excluding holiday pay and bonuses. In her position she was allowed to approve payments of up to 200,000 euros.

However, last November, Coca-Cola summarily dismissed the woman after doubts arose about some large invoices that Baniloki, the company of influencers Bas Smit and Nicolette van Dam, had submitted to the soft drink maker. Coca-Cola would have to pay them 2.6 million euros for promoting the company’s soft drinks on social media.

Research

When Coca-Cola withheld payment in order to conduct further investigation into the invoices and the services provided, the manager had an external mediation company pay Smit and Van Dam 600,000 euros.

In the investigation into the invoices and payments, Coca-Cola ultimately concluded that the woman had flouted all kinds of internal rules regarding concluding contracts. She is also said to have set up constructions to be able to make payments. By breaking them down into smaller amounts, they fell under her approving authority.

Fired immediately

Coca-Cola suspects that the manager conspired with Smit and Van Dam, whom she knew personally, to obtain the payments from Coca-Cola. This is denied by the duo. The soft drink giant ultimately refused to pay the invoices and summarily fired the manager.

Today it appears that not only has a lawsuit been filed regarding the invoices, but that the manager has also gone to court to protest against her dismissal.

According to her, the controversial transactions were not unusual at Coca-Cola, the descriptions of services provided varied because budgets had to be adjusted, there was careless and unobjective research and she was wrongly dismissed.

In court, the woman demanded compensation for unfair dismissal of almost 800,000 euros, compensation of more than half a million for pension damage, and more than 100,000 euros in severance payments. Together more than 1.4 million euros.

Rightly dismissed

However, the marketing manager was blunt. The Amsterdam subdistrict court appears to have ruled earlier this month that Coca-Cola had sufficient reason to summarily dismiss the woman.

The subdistrict court judge concluded firstly that part of the payments requested by the manager had ‘no valid basis’ because the procedures had not been followed. The judge also pointed out, among other things, the varying explanations that the woman gave for her actions and transactions, and the lack of substantiation thereof.

Fake email

The judge also assumes that the woman used a fake email on the basis of which the mediation agency Smit and Van Dam ultimately paid 600,000 euros. The mediator now wants that money back from them. Finally, the judge also questioned previous payments from Coca-Cola to the influencers from 2019.

This means that the summary dismissal remains in force, and the woman can receive all damages and severance payments she demands. The woman did not respond to a request for comment. Her lawyers Marlies Oogjen and Twan Kersten do not want to comment on the ruling, nor do they want to say whether an appeal is being considered.

Coca-Cola spokesperson Duane van Diest says he cannot add much to the statement. “The judge has ruled in our favor. There are sufficient grounds for summary dismissal. But I cannot comment on substantive questions because the other case is still ongoing.”

‘In good faith’

The big question is whether the fired manager of Coca-Cola was in cahoots with Smit and Van Dam to extract payments from the soft drink giant. Coca-Cola suspects this and says that they also knew each other well personally.

The influencer duo strongly denies that there was any collusion. They say they were ‘completely in good faith’ in entering into the agreement. They therefore still demand payment of 2 million euros from the soft drink maker, and do not want to repay the 600,000 euros already received.

According to their spokesperson, the fact that the gilt-edged deal with Coca-Cola was not based on a signed contract, but only verbal agreements, apps, e-mails and presentations, and that it involved high payments for sometimes unclear services, would not be unusual in the world of influencer marketing.

They also deny being friends with the marketing manager. “They live near each other and meet each other in the schoolyard, but they did not visit each other,” said the spokesperson. “It was a friendly, but business contact.”

They blame their client for the fact that a professional organization such as Coca-Cola summarily dismissed a senior marketing manager with 15 years of employment with the permission of the subdistrict court judge. According to them, ‘apparently something went wrong internally at Coca-Cola’, but they could not be blamed for that.

‘Reputation must remain intact’

Smit and Van Dam emphasize that they have requested a witness hearing in court to get to the bottom of the matter. “They would not do that if they were in bad faith,” their spokesperson said. “The testimony will show that they are not to be blamed and that they are entitled to the payment of 2 million. But what is even more important is that their reputation remains intact.”

In a previous court case, the judge granted the witness hearing, which Coca-Cola tried to prevent. So to be continued.