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

August 27, 2012

Employment Subleasing: A New Form of Labor Supply in Vietnam

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

On June 18, 2012, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted a new Labor Code which will take effect on May 1, 2013. One of the most notable issues of the new Labor Code is a provision allowing for the sublease of employees—a practice that is commonly known as labor outsourcing in other jurisdictions.

This is indeed good news for foreign investors involved in the manufacturing and construction sectors, as the nature of their business often requires seasonal workers who can provide services for a short period of time to help meet project deadlines.

Subleasing of employees has become popular in Vietnam’s industrial areas, namely, Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, Dong Nai, Binh Duong, and Can Tho provinces. Until recently, however, subleasing of employees has been illegal. Traditionally, the government had taken the view that this form of labor supply benefits both the employee lessor (the company providing the employees) and the employee lessee (the company receiving the employees), while the employees being outsourced are “exploited.” This is because the hiring company, typically a Vietnam-based foreign company, does not have to pay high salaries and provide correspondingly high statutory insurance schemes, which would need to be provided if they employed the workers directly. Instead, the company providing the employees, usually a local company, pays the sublet employees low salaries and provides minimal insurance schemes, while enjoying the high leasing fees themselves.

The New Subleasing Regime

In order to deal with this imbalance, while also providing companies with a commercially efficient and legally viable option, the new Labor Code stipulates that the employee lessor must pay salary to a sublet employee equal to the salary the employee lessee pays for its own employees at the same level, job, or position of equal value as the sublet employee. In addition to the salary, the employee lessor must pay statutory payment allowances and insurance for the sublet employees.

The new Labor Code legalizes the leasing of labor on the basis of the company being able to meet certain conditions as listed in the Code. Mainly, the Code necessitates a deposit from the hiring company prior to obtaining a license to lease labor. Then, it delegates the government to elaborate other conditions such as the list of the business sectors in which outsourcing is permitted.

In subleasing employees, the employee lessor and the employee lessee must enter into a written sublease agreement that contains the place of work, type of work, work and rest time, labor safety and workplace conditions, term of sublease (12 months at maximum), and the respective rights and obligations of each party toward the sublet employees, among other conditions. The sublease agreement must not contain provisions that adversely affect the rights and benefits of the sublet employees provided in their own labor contracts. In addition, the company supplying employees must notify the sublet employees of “the contents” of the sublease agreement before seconding them to the company outsourcing the employees.

At work, the sublet employee will receive instructions from the hiring company. They must follow the hiring company’s work rules and collective labor agreements provided by the employee lessee. However, in the case of a breach, the employee lessor will act as the real employer of the sublet employee, and has the power to impose disciplinary measures against the violating employee.

Unresolved Issues

In delineating the rights and duties of the related parties to the labor sublease agreement, the new Labor Code still reveals the following shortcomings that the Vietnamese government needs to address in its draft legislation guiding the Code.

First, it is hard to understand why the lawmakers impose a 12-month employment term limit in the sublease agreement, particularly since the sublet employees’ salaries cannot be lower than the salaries of the actual long-term employees of the hiring company. Also, the new Labor Code is silent on the possibility of renewal of the labor sublease agreement.

Second, there is no clear statement on how the Vietnamese labor authorities can enforce the mandatory requirement that the salaries paid to the sublet employees by the employee lessor be equal to (or more than) the employees of the employee lessee (who have the same positions or jobs). The legislation fails to outline a systematic method on how the authorities will identify which employees are at the same level. Moreover, this raises a question as to how this requirement will be applied in cases where no such employee and work position already exists in the hiring company.

Third, as mentioned above, the employee lessor must notify the sublet employees of “the contents” of the sublease agreement. This requirement seems very impractical since there is confidential information inside the sublease agreement that does not necessarily need to be disclosed to a third party, including the sublet employees. The employees’ knowledge should be limited to their rights and benefits following the sublease. They should not know any other information that might relate to trade secrets or the contract price in the sublease agreement. The Vietnamese government should therefore define the mandatory information in the sublease agreement that the employee lessor must disclose to the sublet employees.

Moving in the Right Direction

Despite these shortcomings, however, the new subleasing regime reflects the willingness of the Vietnamese legislature to provide benefits and commercial advantages to foreign investors. The new labor subleasing regime will allow investors to overcome the difficulties that lie with long-term hiring by allowing them to accommodate for seasonal demands for labor in the construction and manufacturing fields. This will not only improve operations management and encourage development initiatives for the investor, but will also enrich employment opportunities for the laborers in Vietnam without sacrificing the protections that labor gets under the Labor Code. With a few revisions, which may occur over time, the new Labor Code provisions on labor outsourcing will be a significant positive legislative development.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 3, 2023
Most employers know that terminating employees for poor job performance is not easy. But it is actually legally possible—if employers have the right approach and take specific precautionary measures. However, failing to take these precautions can mean that an employer is either stuck with an incompetent employee or on the losing end of a lawsuit for unfair termination. This article will lay out some essential considerations for employers in Thailand regarding termination of employment for poor performance. First, understand that “poor work performance” is a lack of performance or ability, or an inability to work with other employees. It does not constitute a violation of work rules or regulations. In some cases, however, an employee’s failure to act in accordance with lawful instructions or commands of the employer, resulting in poor work performance, could also be considered a violation of work rules or regulations. This may be the case if the work rules or regulations clearly state that an employee must strictly comply with the employer’s instructions or commands. Second, an employer can, in fact, terminate an employee due to poor work performance. For example, this may be possible in the following scenarios: Records show that an employee’s work performance has fallen below the employer’s required standards, and the employee has not tried to improve his or her work performance for three consecutive years. In addition, it does not appear that the employer was biased when giving ratings or scores for the employee’s work performance. The job description of the employee includes coordination with employees in other departments, but the employee has not been able to do so. Therefore, the employee was reassigned to a new job function, but the employee still did not improve. This suggests that the employee has a lack of interpersonal skills and is not
Read More
March 23, 2023
On March 19, 2023, Thailand’s new work-from-home (WFH) legislation amending the Labour Protection Act (No. 8) B.E. 2566 (2023) was published in the Government Gazette. It will come into effect on April 18, 2023. The amendment aims to enhance employee protections to accord with current global standards, provide alternative working arrangements for employers and employees, increase workforce efficiency, and strengthen employees’ job security and a better quality of life. As we detailed previously, the new WFH legislation allows employers and employees to reach agreements that permit employees to work remotely. Since there are no accompanying criminal punishments relating to this new provision, and the legislation incorporates the term “may agree,” it appears that this WFH provision is not mandatory but is primarily intended to facilitate and encourage remote working agreements between employers and employees. For more details on the WFH legislation, or on any aspect of employment law in Thailand, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected].
Read More
February 24, 2023
Many companies have moved to Southeast Asia to benefit from the advantages of this vibrant and diverse market. The region is already a manufacturing hub for a multitude of industries—computer and automotive products in Thailand, textiles in Cambodia, and footwear and electrical goods in Vietnam, to name a few—and an increasing number of companies worldwide are reconfiguring their supply chains to include regional suppliers. A key challenge is keeping up to date with employment law trends in these jurisdictions to ensure compliance with local regulations—and avoid costly, time-consuming business interruption. Here we outline trends and recent regulatory developments in Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam, and consider what they mean for employers. Cambodia The Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training (MLVT) is likely to pursue a more proactive enforcement strategy in 2023. Last May, the MLVT announced companies would be required to submit a twice yearly self-declaration on labour compliance through a new online system. The self-declaration form requires companies to confirm and upload evidence of compliance, and the MLVT online system—through which the ministry can easily determine if a company is compliant –generates a report that lists all fines. Companies should comply with the self-declaration requirement and carefully review the form to understand what fines will apply for non-compliance. On 1 October 2022, regulations relating to the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) pension system came into effect, and employers and employees began making NSSF pension contributions. Over the next five years, total compulsory pension contributions will amount to 4% of an employee’s wage, half of which is paid by the employer and half deducted from the employee’s salary. The contribution wage is capped at KHR 1.2m (USD 300). Employers are currently required to pay a relatively small amount (KHR 24,000, or around USD 6). This will increase to 10.75% over
Read More
January 19, 2023
The Thai parliament has passed the so-called Work from Home Bill—formally known as Labour Protection Act (No. 8) B.E. 2566 (2023)—which amends the country’s Labour Protection Act (LPA) to reflect current circumstances. The accompanying legislative remark states that the proposed amendments to the LPA will provide additional options for work arrangements between employers and employees, upgrade the level of labor protection, increase work stability, and improve quality of life for employees in Thailand. The legislation adds a single section to the LPA providing that an employer and an employee “may agree in the employment contract” that the employee is allowed “to bring work . . . to perform at home or at the residence of the employee or anywhere that the employee can work remotely through information technology, if the nature of the work permits.” The provision further provides that employers are responsible for ensuring that remote work agreements are in writing, either physically or electronically, and may include the following details: Period of the agreement; Normal working hours, rest periods, and overtime work; Criteria for overtime work, holiday work, and various types of leave; Scope of work and control or supervision by the employer; and Responsibility for arranging supplies and equipment, including necessary costs relating to the work. The amended LPA gives employees who work from home the right to refuse contact from the employer or the supervisor beyond working hours. In addition, employers must treat remote employees equally to on-premise employees. The most notable question surrounding this legislation is whether employers must allow employees to work remotely. The phrase “may agree” suggests that employers do not have to agree to allow an employee to work remotely. Another important aspect of the amendment is that there is no criminal punishment attached to it, which suggests that the legislation
Read More