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

December 2, 2016

Vietnam: Enhanced Criminal Liability for Unlawful Dismissals Has Been Delayed

Subscribe to Updates
Taylor Vinters – International Employment Law Update

On June 29, 2016, the National Assembly of Vietnam passed a resolution to delay the implementation of Vietnam’s new Penal Code (“New Code”) allegedly due to the discovery of numerous errors contained within the New Code.

As a result of the resolution, enhanced criminal liability for unlawful dismissals under the New Code will not apply until an amended version of the New Code takes effect. Until then, the provisions of the current Penal Code (“Current Code”), containing less severe penalties, will continue to apply.

In Vietnam, criminal liability for unlawful dismissal can be imposed in addition to any civil liability the employer might face under local labor laws. Under the Current Code, a person can incur criminal liability for “unlawfully forcing an employee to leave his or her job, causing serious consequences,” whereas under the New Code, the elements of the offense have been reworded to include “the unlawful dismissal of an employee” or “the use of force or threats to cause an employee to resign,” if such an act “results in hardship for that employee or his/her family, or leads to a strike.”

No detailed guidance has been issued on the meaning of “serious consequences,” or what constitutes “unlawfully forcing,” under the Current Code. The language of the New Code, in comparison, appears to be somewhat clearer. For example, it is likely that the “unlawful dismissal” element can be fulfilled by noncompliance with existing labor laws which set out clear legal grounds for dismissal and the procedures that must be followed. Thus, although the meaning “hardship” remains vague, there appears to be enough legal guidance to be able to determine if an unlawful dismissal has taken place.

Penalties under the New Code include a monetary fine ranging from VND 10 million (approximately EUR 400) to VND 100 million (approximately EUR 4,000), a non-custodial sentence of up to one year, or a period of imprisonment of between three months and one year.

The penalties for aggravating circumstances, as defined in the New Code, include a monetary fine ranging from VND 100 million (approximately EUR 4,000) to VND 200 million (approximately EUR 8,000), a period of imprisonment of between one and three years, and a prohibition on individual offenders from holding certain positions for one to five years.

Comment

Employers should be aware that implementation of the New Code has been delayed and that the provisions of the Current Code continue to apply. Employers should also note (in addition to the provisions set out herein), that when the New Code comes into force, both legal representatives and general directors may incur enhanced penalties if they are liable for unlawful dismissal under the New Code.

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