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

June 30, 2025

Cambodia Updates Procedures for Resolving Individual Labor Disputes

Subscribe to Updates

On March 4, 2025, Cambodia’s Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training (MLVT) issued Prakas No. 073/25 on Procedures for Resolving Individual Labor Disputes, replacing Prakas No. 318 on the same topic from 2001 and introducing significant changes to how individual labor disputes are filed, processed, and escalated.

In addition, Prakas No. 073 outlines the roles and responsibilities of labor inspectors, the process for filing and handling complaints, and the steps for conciliation and further legal recourse, as described below.

Filing a Complaint

Any party to an individual labor dispute can file a complaint with the Labor Dispute Department of the MLVT or the Department of Labor at the capital or provincial level. Upon receiving a complaint, a labor inspector will review the case and may initiate either conciliation or a labor inspection. Invitation letters will be issued to the disputing parties to provide relevant information and documents.

Conciliation Process

Prakas No. 073 places strong emphasis on the conciliation process, introducing strict procedural rules and deadlines with clear consequences for noncompliance:

  • If the claimant fails to provide required information within the specified deadline (or within three working days thereafter without reasonable excuse), the complaint is deemed void.
  • If the respondent fails to attend the conciliation meeting within the deadline (or within three working days thereafter without reasonable excuse), the conciliation is considered unsuccessful, and the respondent is deemed guilty as claimed.

Once all necessary information is gathered, a labor inspector will invite both parties to a joint conciliation meeting, which must be held within three weeks of the complaint being received.

  • If the claimant fails to attend the meeting or sign the minutes without a reasonable excuse, the complaint is void.
  • If the respondent fails to attend the meeting without a reasonable excuse, the conciliation is unsuccessful, and the respondent is deemed guilty as claimed.

If conciliation fails, the parties may jointly request further reconciliation by the MLVT within two working days. The MLVT may appoint or change the conciliator. If this second attempt fails, no further reconciliation may be requested, and the parties must proceed with a different dispute resolution mechanism.

Referral to Arbitration Councils

During the conciliation, either party may request referral of the matter to the Arbitration Council, an independent, national institution empowered to assist in resolving labor disputes. In such a case, the labor inspector must report this within two working days to the minister of the MLVT, who will then refer the case to the Arbitration Council within three working days (except for complaints deemed void).

Conclusion

Prakas No. 073 introduces a structured and time-bound framework for resolving individual labor disputes, emphasizing prompt conciliation, clear procedural requirements, and defined avenues for further legal action. It aims to enhance the efficiency and fairness of dispute resolution, particularly in individual labor cases.

Related Professionals

Practices

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

May 10, 2021
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins’ offices in Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam have contributed chapters on labor law in these jurisdictions to the Global Employment Law Guide, published by Lex Mundi. The guide provides answers to key employment-related legal questions in 57 jurisdictions around the world, with all entries provided by member firms in the global Lex Mundi legal network. Each chapter contains in-depth information on the jurisdiction’s legal framework governing employment relationships, including coverage of the following topics: Employment categories and contract types Employee rights and protections Employment termination Leave and social benefits Restrictive covenants COVID-19 vaccination mandates and post-pandemic workplace reopening Readers can browse the contributions, generate country-specific reports, and compare attorney-client privilege in multiple jurisdictions. For more information, please visit the Lex Mundi website.
Read More
March 2, 2021
Maintaining positive employee relations is a top concern for virtually all companies. Many companies in Thailand—especially those located in the country’s industrial estates—have labor unions, while others rely on other non-union pathways for attending to the concerns of employees. In all of these cases, the union or collective group of employees also chooses members of the “employee committee” that is charged with fostering good relations and open communications with the employer through regular meetings dedicated to discussion of workplace matters. Companies with a workforce of 50 or more employees need to understand the roles of the employee committee and the specific rights accorded to the committee members, which are different from the rights of the other employees. Besides the obvious benefits that this understanding has for relations with their employees, it is also important if an employer takes disciplinary action against employee committee members, as violation of a committee member’s rights could result in the employer facing criminal penalties. The legal basis for these employee committees is the Labor Relations Act B.E. 2518 (LRA), which stipulates that in any workplace with at least 50 employees, the employees or their labor union of the business establishment is entitled to establish an employee committee. Members are elected (or, in the case of a labor union, appointed) to three-year terms on the committee, with the total number of committee members depending on the size of the workforce, as shown in the table. Membership Requirements Among partially unionized workforces, labor unions are generally given precedence when it comes to control of the committee. If a labor union whose members account for more than 20% of the total employees in a workplace, the union gets to appoint the majority of the employee committee members (e.g., four out of a seven-person committee, five of a
Read More
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension
Read More