Let’s begin with a paradox.

In the second quarter of 2025, the Dutch labour market appeared… calm. Vacancies fell by 7,000. Unemployed fell by 4,000. Jobs increased by 24,000. The magic number? For every 100 unemployed people, there were 101 open vacancies. A perfect balance, right?

Hold that thought.

In governance and risk, equilibrium is often an optical illusion. When metrics line up too neatly, it’s not a sign of harmony, but of tension hiding behind polite numbers.

So let’s decode the dance beneath the decimal.

101 Vacancies per 100 Unemployed: Why That Ratio Lies

At first glance, a 1:1 ratio between vacancies and unemployed workers suggests a healthy market. But this assumes that each vacancy is matchable with each unemployed person. That’s rarely true.

• A vacancy in cybersecurity doesn’t help a laid-off warehouse worker.
• A part-time care job in Groningen doesn’t help a full-time engineer in Rotterdam.

Behind that “101” ratio are mismatches in skills, mobility, contract expectations, and sectoral shifts. A number without friction is a number without honesty.

This is where compliance and governance should ask:

What does full employment mean if the system keeps creating people nobody wants to hire?

Jobs Up. Hours Down. Welcome to the Age of Fragmentation

Here’s a quieter signal: while 24,000 new jobs were added, the total number of hours worked dropped.

• Employees worked slightly more.
• But self-employed workers worked 2.4% fewer hours.

In other words, we’re not seeing growth, we’re seeing redistribution. Fewer hours sliced more finely, across more names in the payroll.

This is not job creation. This is job inflation.

We’re hiring more… to produce the same. Which means productivity per capita is shrinking.

For entrepreneurs and risk officers, this is critical. When cost per head rises while output plateaus, your business model is bleeding. Quietly.

The Slow Death of the Self-Employed Dream

Let’s speak bluntly.

In the Netherlands, the self-employed (ZZP’ers) have long been a symbol of flexibility and economic agility. But in Q2 2025, their numbers fell by 19,000, the second consecutive drop.

This isn’t anecdotal. It’s systemic.

• Companies are rehiring employees with permanent contracts.
• Self-employed hours are dropping.
• The narrative around “flexibility” is losing its luster in boardrooms.

This signals a return to risk internalisation. Firms are choosing compliance certainty over freelance cost-cutting. A logical shift, especially in a regulatory climate where the boundaries of gig work are tightening.

Sector Spotlight: Hospitality Fades, Healthcare Holds, Construction Hangs On

Three details that matter more than headlines:

• Hospitality: Down by 3,000 vacancies, confirming the sector’s fragility.
• Healthcare: Up by 1,000 vacancies, despite already being the most stretched. This is demand, not growth.
• Construction: Highest vacancy rate (80 per 1,000 jobs) but no net job growth. That’s a structural bottleneck.

Read between the lines: we’re not just short of workers, we’re short of workforce allocation intelligence.

Behind the Curtain: What 4,000 Fewer Unemployed Really Means

Let’s look at flows, not just figures.

📊 386,000 people were unemployed in Q2

📈 211,000 found jobs

📉 190,000 became unemployed

🔁 123,000 joined the job-seeking population from inactivity

So, yes: we lost 4,000 unemployed on paper. But the churn is fierce. The market isn’t stable, it’s spinning fast in place.

Add to that 535,000 part-time workers who want more hours but aren’t counted as unemployed. That’s your real undercurrent. That’s your real pressure point.

What This Means for the Entrepreneur

If you're running a company, especially a micro or small one, here’s your call to action:

1. Don't chase job creation headlines. Focus on work-hour efficiency and match quality.
2. Audit your labour flexibility. The ZZP model may soon cost more, in risk and regulation, than it saves in margins.
3. Study your sector’s vacancy curve. Are you hiring in a dying branch, or are you training for resilience?
4. Read flows, not stocks. Stability in numbers can hide instability in transitions.
5. Respect underutilisation. That 535,000 figure isn’t noise. It’s your next wave of frustration, disengagement, and silent resignation.

Why This Isn’t Just a Labour Market Story

It’s a governance story. A resilience story. A behavioural truth.

We like to think that “stable” numbers mean a stable system. But in reality, macro-stability often hides micro-chaos. It’s not the number that matters, it’s the narrative behind it.

As always, I’m not here to impress you. I’m here to help you see clearly.

And the clarity here is simple:

The Dutch labour market isn’t in balance. It’s in limbo, masked by a thin sheet of equilibrium, fraying underneath.

Governance begins when we stop believing in clean numbers and start understanding messy systems.