What the British School Closure (BSN Senior School Leidschenveen) Means to EPO Staff
The Local Staff Committee The Hague (LSCTH) wrote to EPO staff based in The Netherlands about the "Closure [of] BSN [The British School in the Netherlands] Senior School Leidschenveen," as noted back in July. "In our letter of 25 June," they noted, "we requested exceptional measures to help colleagues navigate the impending closure of the BSN Senior School Leidschenveen. The Staff Representation TH [The Hague] takes note of the Office's position, in particular regarding Article 20 of CA/D 4/21 but respectfully disagrees with its interpretation."
The following message was sent on the second week of July:
From: Social Dialogue on behalf of VP 1To: LSCTH
Cc: VP1/PD42
Subject: RE: open letter from the LSCTH – BSN
Date: 08.07.2026
Dear Chair,
Thank you for your letter of 25 June 2026 and for the constructive discussion at our meeting of 17 June 2026 on the announced closure of the BSN Senior School Leidschenveen. The Office is aware that the announced closure may give rise to questions for affected families, in particular regarding continuity of education, possible additional costs and practical arrangements during the phase-out period.
The decision to merge the BSN Senior Schools was made by BSN under its own governance arrangements, with a view to ensuring the school’s long-term sustainability. The Office was not involved in this decision. Consequently, the phase-out and any related arrangements between BSN and individual families fall, in the first instance, under BSN’s responsibility.
As regards your request to maintain the transitional measures provided for under Article 20 of CA/D 4/21, including where families may consider changing school as a direct consequence of the closure, the Office cannot extend the application of those measures beyond their defined scope. The transitional measures were introduced as a one-off mechanism in the context of the 2021 reform of the education and childcare benefits framework. Their purpose was to ensure a balanced transition to the new framework while avoiding disruption to a child’s education cycle. Applying these transitional measures to situations not foreseen by CA/D 4/21, such as the BSN reorganisation, which concerns the location at which education is provided and not the educational programme as such, would therefore be inconsistent with their purpose and legal framework.
As regards your request concerning the financing of transportation between campuses where pupils may be required to attend different BSN sites during the phase-out period, the Office considers that the organisation and funding of transport between BSN campuses form part of BSN’s transition plan and remain a matter for BSN. The Office supports eligible staff members through a fixed monthly lump sum intended to help cover indirect education costs.
The Office will nevertheless convey the concerns raised by families to BSN and request that practical arrangements, including transport-related issues, be addressed as part of the transition planning.
The Office is also mindful of the cases you describe in which families may face late cancellation fees while awaiting enrolment confirmations. While these remain contractual matters between the families concerned and BSN, the Office will raise them with BSN management and request that families be treated fairly, considering the timelines resulting from the closure announcement.
As regards your request for close monitoring of the phase-out process, timely and transparent information for affected families, and support where required, the Office will continue to maintain regular contact with BSN management. It will remain attentive to the implementation of the phase-out and will continue to request that parents and pupils be informed promptly and transparently of any relevant developments.
Best wishes,
Social Dialogue on behalf of VP1
This was chased again last week:
Staff Committee The Hague
Comité du personnel de La Haye
Personalausschuss Den HaagRijswijk, 03 September 2026
sc26020hlTo: VP1; Cc: social dialogue
Open Letter: reply to VP1 letter of 08 July 2026
Subject: British School ClosureDear Mr Rowan, dear colleagues,
In our letter of 25 June, we requested exceptional measures to help colleagues navigate the impending closure of the BSN Senior School Leidschenveen. The Staff Representation TH takes note of the Office's position, in particular regarding Article 20 of CA/D 4/21 but respectfully disagrees with its interpretation.
The Office argues that the transitional measures were intended solely as a one-off mechanism linked to the 2021 reform and cannot be applied to situations not expressly foreseen by CA/D 4/21. This interpretation focuses exclusively on the historical context in which those measures were adopted while disregarding their underlying purpose.
The objective of Article 20 was to protect children and families from educational disruption and to ensure continuity throughout a child's education cycle. The announced closure of the BSN Senior School Leidschenveen creates precisely the type of disruption that the transitional measures were designed to prevent. Families who made long-term educational choices in good faith are now confronted with significant uncertainty and potential additional costs through circumstances entirely beyond their control.
Moreover, the families concerned are not seeking any additional financial support beyond that already available to them under Article 20 of CA/D 4/21. They are merely requesting the continuation of the existing level of support in response to an unforeseen situation that threatens the continuity of their children's education. Against this background, the Office's response appears unduly rigid and insufficiently attentive to the very real difficulties faced by the affected families.
Furthermore, the existing regulatory framework already provides the necessary flexibility to address exceptional situations of this nature. Article 17(3) of CA/D 4/21 expressly empowers the President to adopt further measures to ensure a smooth transition to the new scheme. The existence of this provision demonstrates that the legislator anticipated the need for pragmatic solutions where the application of the new framework may lead to unforeseen hardship.
In light of the above, and considering that the requested measure would be financially neutral for the Office while the consequences for the affected families are potentially substantial, we respectfully invite the Office to reconsider its position and to give due consideration to the legitimate expectations and interests of the colleagues concerned.
Best regards,
Isabelle Brandt, on behalf of the Local Staff Committee The Hague
As a reminder, today is the last day for staff to poke the bear that's stealing from them while granting monopolies in Europe to corporations that aren't European (only about a third of European Patens go to European people/companies).
The EPO weakens the European economy. It does so for profit.
The only European thing about the EPO is the staff. But that too is changing due to outsourcing to India and the US. █