Soft drinks maker Coca-Cola has been allowed to fire a marketing director because she did not play by the rules when concluding a controversial deal with influencers Bas Smit and Nicolette Van Dam. As a result of this deal, Smit and Van Damme are now demanding €2 million from Coca-Cola.
RTL Z revealed the multi-million dollar feud on Saturday, and reported yesterday that it involved influencers Smit and Van Damme.
It now appears that a lawsuit has also been filed over the director's dismissal, with the woman demanding more than €1.4 million in damages and severance pay. In this dismissal case, more details emerge about the controversial multi-million dollar deal.
Million dollar deal
The 41-year-old has worked at Coca-Cola since 2009, where she rose to a senior marketing position. She received approximately 8,900 euros per month, excluding holiday pay and bonuses. In her position she was allowed to approve payments of up to €200,000.
However, last November, Coca-Cola summarily fired the woman after suspicions were raised over some large invoices that Paniloki, the company of influencers Bas Smit and Nicolette Van Dam, had submitted to the soft drink maker. Coca-Cola will 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 further investigate the invoices and services provided, the manager asked an external brokerage firm to pay Smit and Van Dam €600,000.
In investigating invoices and payments, Coca-Cola eventually concluded that the woman had violated all kinds of internal rules related to concluding contracts. She is also said to have set up facilities to be able to make payments. By dividing it into smaller quantities, it falls under its own approval authority.
Shoot immediately
Coca-Cola suspects that the manager conspired with Smit and Van Dam, whom she knew personally, to obtain payments from Coca-Cola. This is what the duo denies. The soft drink giant eventually refused to pay the bills and summarily fired the manager.
Today it appears that not only has a lawsuit been filed over the bills, but the principal has also gone to court to protest her dismissal.
According to her, controversial transactions were not unusual at Coca-Cola, descriptions of services provided varied because budgets had to be adjusted, there was negligent and subjective research and she was wrongly dismissed.
The woman demanded in court compensation for unfair dismissal of about 800,000 euros, compensation for more than half a million euros for pension damages, and more than 100,000 euros in end-of-service compensation. Together more than 1.4 million euros.
It was rightly rejected
However, the marketing director was frank. The Amsterdam Sub-District Court appears to have ruled earlier this month that Coca-Cola had sufficient cause to summarily dismiss the woman.
The district court judge first concluded that part of the payments requested by the director had “no proper basis” because procedures had not been followed. The judge also noted, among other things, the varying explanations the woman gave for her actions and transactions, and the lack of evidence to prove this.
Fake email
The judge also assumes that the woman used a fake email on the basis of which the mediation agency eventually paid Smit and Van Dam €600,000. The broker now wants this money back from them. Finally, the judge also questioned previous payments made by Coca-Cola to influencers starting in 2019.
This means that summary dismissal remains in effect, and the woman can receive all the compensation and severance payments she seeks. The woman did not respond to a request for comment. Her lawyers, Marlis Ojen and Tuan Kirsten, do not want to comment on the ruling, nor do they want to say whether an appeal is being considered.
Coca-Cola spokesman Duane Van Diest says he can't 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 Coca-Cola executive is collaborating with Smit and Van Damme to extract payments from the soft drink giant. Coca-Cola suspects this and says they know each other well personally.
The influential duo strongly deny any collusion. They say they were in “full good faith” in entering into the agreement. Therefore, they are still demanding a payment of €2 million from the soft drink maker, and do not want to repay the €600,000 they have already received.
According to a company spokesperson, the fact that the landmark deal with Coca-Cola was not based on a signed contract, but rather on verbal agreements, applications, emails and presentations only, and that it involved paying high sums for services that were sometimes unclear, would… be worrying. It's not unusual in the world of influencer marketing.
They also denied being friends with the marketing director. “They live close to each other and meet each other in the school grounds, but have not visited each other,” the spokesman said. “It was a friendly but business contact.”
They blame their client for the fact that a professional organization like Coca-Cola summarily dismissed a senior marketing manager with 15 years of employment with the permission of a sub-district court judge. According to them, “It seems that something went wrong internally at Coca-Cola,” but they cannot be blamed for that.
“Reputation must remain intact.”
Smit and Van Dam confirm that they asked to hear from a witness in court to get to the bottom of the matter. “They would not do so if they were in bad faith,” their spokesman said. “The testimony will show that they cannot be blamed and that they deserve to be paid $2 million. But more importantly, their reputation remains intact.”
In a previous lawsuit, the judge allowed witnesses to be heard, which Coca-Cola tried to prevent. Until it continues.
Avid music fanatic. Communicator. Social media expert. Award-winning bacon scholar. Alcohol fan.