You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

March 24, 2020

Actions Available to Employers in Vietnam Facing COVID-19 Business Disruption

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unavoidable impact on the economy of Vietnam. While the country’s infection numbers remain commendably low thanks to timely and strict containment and mitigation efforts, everyday life and business have still been turned upside-down as buildings have been closed and neighborhoods have been quarantined, and consumers have dramatically changed their spending patterns.

Under these epidemic conditions, while some companies have been able to shift employees to a work-from-home model with minimal disruption, others have been forced to temporarily shut down or curtail operations due to government orders or a lack of customers, leading to the uncomfortable question of what to do with idle employees. Even companies which have successfully switched to an online/work-from-home model are facing difficult decisions about certain types of employees who are no longer being utilized, such as drivers and cleaners.

In the unfortunate situation that continuing with full employment becomes unviable, companies in Vietnam have some options: They can let people go under a restructuring (akin to a layoff); they can keep the employees but renegotiate lower salaries for a temporary period; or they can negotiate mutual termination/voluntary resignation.

1. Restructuring

Article 36.10 of the 2012 Labor Code (valid until January 1, 2021, when it will be replaced by the new 2019 Labor Code) allows employers to terminate the labor contracts of employees in the case of layoffs/redundancy due to “restructuring, changes in technology, or economic reasons.” Decree No. 05/2015/ND-CP of the Government dated January 12, 2015, as amended on October 24, 2018, further defines economic reasons to include economic crisis or recession. Thus, it could be argued that if the COVID-19 pandemic has brought about a recession (which currently is true in Vietnam), then terminations via layoffs would be justifiable.

However, under Vietnam’s labor law, if two or more employees are made redundant, the employer must formulate a “labor usage plan” for the restructuring, identifying who will be let go, and send this to the local trade union, or the employer’s own trade union, if it has one. The employer must then wait for the trade union’s consent, which, in practice, may take two months or more. Some local trade unions may not provide a clear opinion on whether they consent to the provided labor usage plan, but will instead simply reply that the company is required to formulate and implement a labor usage plan in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations of Vietnam. If this is the case, the employer may need to work again with the local trade union, which will take additional time. The provincial labor authority must then be notified of the employees’ termination at least 30 days before the terminations occur. Thus, the timeline for such restructuring can be very long.

Each employee let go must receive one month’s salary per year of service (which does not include the time that the employee participated in unemployment insurance)—and a minimum of two months’ salary—as payment due to termination as a result of redundancy.

2. Temporary Salary Reduction

Vietnam has a few special rules relating to epidemics. Specifically, under Article 98.3 of the Labor Code, if an epidemic (or other force majeure event) has been declared and work must be stopped, employers are allowed to renegotiate with their employees to temporarily accept a lower salary during the work stoppage, provided it is not lower than the statutory regional minimum wage.

As the regional minimum wage is relatively low (currently about USD 190 per month for Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City), salary renegotiation may not be an attractive option for employees, especially those in skilled or white-collar positions.

3. Negotiate Mutual Separation

Because the restructuring process can take a long time, and salary renegotiation may be rejected by the employees, it is always best to meet with the employees, tell them the company is going to conduct a restructuring and thus their positions will be eliminated, but offer them an incentive to agree to a mutual separation. This saves the employer the time of going through the statutory process and saves the employees’ time as well.

Most employees should accept a mutual separation package, which is usually two to three months’ salary, except for those with long service.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 16, 2026
Employment law specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins’ office in Vientiane have contributed the Laos chapter to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce from International Employment Lawyer. This comprehensive global guide, covering 50 jurisdictions worldwide, addresses the complex issue of workplace restructurings, with a particular focus on the needs of multinational companies. The Laos chapter was prepared by associates Naiyane Xaechao and Sayphin Singsouvong. The Q&A-style chapter provides in-depth analysis of key areas related to workplace restructuring, including: Reduction in workforce; Restructuring or reorganization of the business; Changing terms and conditions; and Areas to watch. A PDF of the Laos chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam chapters to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce 2026. To browse the full guide for all 45 jurisdictions, please visit the International Employment Lawyer website.
January 16, 2026
Employment law specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins’ office in Phnom Penh have contributed the Cambodia chapter to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce from International Employment Lawyer. This comprehensive global guide, covering 50 jurisdictions worldwide, addresses the complex issue of workplace restructurings, with a particular focus on the needs of multinational companies. The Cambodia chapter was authored by Jay Cohen, partner and director of Tilleke & Gibbins’ Phnom Penh office, and Chanvisal Lok, associate. The Q&A-style chapter provides in-depth analysis of key areas related to workplace restructuring, including: Reduction in workforce; Restructuring or reorganization of the business; Changing terms and conditions; and Areas to watch. A PDF of the Cambodia chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam chapters to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce 2026. To browse the full guide for all 45 jurisdictions, please visit the International Employment Lawyer website.
January 14, 2026
Employers operating in Thailand can enforce post-employment noncompete covenants, but success depends on precise drafting and strong evidentiary support. Thai courts will uphold restraints that protect legitimate employer interests and are fair and reasonable in duration, geographic reach, and substantive scope. Overbroad covenants, however, draw judicial skepticism and may fail unless they are drafted in severable, defensible components tied to the employee’s actual role. This article synthesizes recent trends in Thai case practice, explains how Thai courts assess reasonableness in employment restraints, and provides a practical litigation-focused framework for drafting enforceable covenants, preparing evidence, and pursuing relief through the Labor Court. The Legal Framework and Its Practical Implications Thai courts evaluate noncompete covenants under general principles of contract enforceability and public policy, with particular focus on whether a restraint is necessary to protect a legitimate employer interest and proportionate to that objective. In employment matters, this analysis is shaped by the employee-protective tenor of Thai labor law and by the Labor Court’s equitable discretion in determining appropriate remedies. The practical takeaway is that standardized or broadly drafted covenants rarely survive scrutiny. Courts look for a demonstrable nexus between the employee’s actual exposure to confidential information, trade secrets, or customer relationships and the scope of the restraint. Where that nexus is weak or the restraint operates as a blanket prohibition, courts are inclined to decline enforcement or limit relief to a narrowly tailored prohibition. The employer interests most commonly recognized as legitimate in Thai practice include the protection of trade secrets, confidential business information, and goodwill tied to identifiable customer segments or territories. Courts are more likely to enforce restraints where employers can clearly document what information is at risk, why particular customer relationships matter, and how the employee was involved with those assets. Judges also look closely at the
December 19, 2025
On December 12, 2025, Thailand’s Ministry of Labor published a ministerial regulation prescribing the minimum and maximum wages used as a base for calculating social security contributions. The regulation, which takes effect on January 1, 2026, sets a flat minimum base wage of THB 1,650 per month and a phased increase of the maximum base wage over the following six years, as outlined in the table below. Impact on Social Security Benefits Not only will monthly contributions increase as a result of the adjustment to the maximum wages used as a base for calculating social security contributions, but the maximum benefits available to insured persons will also be enhanced, as shown in the next table. Employer Obligations From January 1, 2026, employers must correctly withhold wages and remit social security contributions for both the employer’s and employees’ portions in compliance with the revised thresholds. Failure to comply may expose employers to penalties under the Social Security Act B.E. 2533 (1990). Employers should ensure that payroll systems are updated as necessary to reflect these changes to the wage ceiling used for social security contribution calculations.