Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce

Yes, there is. An employee is redundant if the following conditions are met:

• the employer adopted a decision on organisational change;
• the change concerns the scope of activities, tasks, technical equipment, number of employees, or otherwise alters the structure of the employer;
• the aim of the change is to increase work efficiency, reduce costs, or otherwise alter the performance of the employer’s enterprise; and
• as a result, the employee’s work is redundant or not needed.

According to case law, the employee’s work is not needed, either at all or at least in part, with the rest being distributed among the current employees or corporate body. Rebranding the position, hiring a new employee to carry out the work of the dismissed employee shortly thereafter, or otherwise fabricating the redundancy with an ulterior motive does not qualify as redundancy.

Czech law provides two other similar reasons based on which an employer is entitled to terminate employment – closing down or relocation of the employer’s undertaking or its part. Together with redundancy, these three reasons are known as “organisational reasons” (in Czech: “organizační důvody”) for termination of employment. However, closing down and relocation of the employer or its part are different reasons than the redundancy itself, and therefore we do not address them further.

Although there are no legislative provisions regarding (or defining) redundancy in Myanmar, the concept is recognised. In this regard, clause 15(b)(4) of the Employment Contract Template (EC) provides for redundancies and termination of employment. The EC is a standard form issued by the Ministry of Labour (MOL) and contains mandatory provisions to be included in all employment contracts.

Section 15(b)(1) of the EC states that an employer may dismiss an employee only with justified reasons. However, no mention is made of what is considered to be a justified reason.   

As per our discussions with labour officials, dismissal of employees due to a shortage of work or for other economic reasons may be considered a justified reason. However, it will not be considered justified if it affects only a singular employee or is based on biased decision-making. In such cases, the Labour Disputes Settlement Arbitration Body (LDSAB) and Labour Disputes Settlement Arbitration Council (LDSAC) have the power to order reinstatement of the employee.

The employer must take the following steps:

• review underlying documents (including organisational charts), decide what organisational change needs to be made and work out which positions are no longer needed, and plan the timing;
• adopt a decision on organisational change, including its effective date and which redundant positions are cancelled. The decision doesn’t have to be in writing or state reasons for the redundancy. However, both are highly recommended and a market standard, as this serves as evidence;
• if there are unions, consult the unions in advance (see question 4), and if a union representative is supposed to be made redundant, obtain the union’s consent in advance (see question 11);
• execute dismissal either by a termination agreement (recommended) or a termination notice with the redundant employees. In case of termination notice, the redundancy must (based on the decision) take effect on or before the notice period expired, not after; and
• implement the organisational change (including updating organisational charts).

Organisational changes may also be governed by collective agreements, in which case additional rules may apply (this applies to all the questions below).

Pursuant to clause 15(b)(4) of the EC, an employer shall cooperate and negotiate with the workplace coordinating committee (WCC) if there is no labour organisation. A WCC must be formed if there are more than 30 employees. If there is a labour organisation, the employer must cooperate and negotiate with representatives of the labour organisation, the WCC, the employee, and the representative of the employee jointly, as applicable. In addition, according to labour officers, if there is no labour organisation or WCC, the employer should consult and negotiate with employees or their representatives before terminating employment on the basis of redundancy. In addition, the employer must inform the Department of Labour (DOL) or the Department of Labour Relations about redundancies and termination of employment.

Yes, Czech law provides a special procedure for “collective dismissal” in all three cases of organisational changes (see question 1).

The threshold is:

• ten employees if the employer has 20 to 100 employees;
• 10% of employees if the employer has 101 to 300 employees; and
• 30 employees if the employer has more than 300 employees.

The respective number of employees must be dismissed due to redundancy within a period of 30 days. If at least five employees are dismissed within 30 days by termination notice due to redundancy, then employees dismissed in the same period by termination agreement are included in these thresholds.

In addition to the process above, collective dismissal must be:

• consulted with unions 30 days in advance, or notified to each affected employee if there are no active unions at the employer; and
• notified to the local Labour Office: (i) in advance, including information on commencement of the consultation process with unions; and (ii) on its result once it’s completed, in the form of a written report that must be delivered in copy to unions, which then have the right to comment on it – employment relationships can terminate only after the lapse of 30 days following this.

As stated, there are no legal provisions on redundancy. The EC also does not distinguish between collective and individual redundancy. Accordingly, there is no prescribed number for a collective redundancy. However, the officers of the DOL have informed us that if a redundancy was caused by a shortage of work, economic crisis, or business closure, the redundancy should not affect only one employee.

Yes, the employer must consult any termination notice in advance. Agreement doesn’t have to be reached (with the exception of employees with enhanced protection; see question 11). In practice, the consultation is more of an announcement.

In case of collective dismissal, consultation must take place, and the employer must try to reach an agreement and inform the Labour Office of the result.

An employer must follow the consultation process set out in question 2 above, ie, consult with the employee, WCC, and/or labour organisation. No further consultations are required.

Sections 6(a) and 7 of the Settlement of Labour Dispute Law (SLDL) require that settlement be reached within seven days, failing which, either of the parties can submit a complaint to the township Labour Disputes Settlement Conciliation Body (LDSCB), according to Section 9(b) of the SLDL.

It is the employer’s right to make an organisational change and its factual validity cannot be challenged. However, the individual dismissals may be challenged by employees. If successful (ie, the employer doesn’t prove redundancy), the restructure in the individual case may be prevented.

In the case of collective dismissals, it may be delayed by the unions prolonging the consultation. However, even then the unions and the Labour Office can’t prevent the dismissal, and the only way to prevent individual dismissal is a successful individual challenge by the dismissed employee.

If the unions believe that the collective agreement was violated by the redundancy or in the process of its implementation, they may dispute this violation. The dispute may be resolved by a mediator or escalated to an arbitrator. However, this doesn’t prevent the employer from executing the dismissals or restructure (only if violation is later found, it may have certain implications based on the individual collective agreement and nature of its violation).

There are no legal provisions that speak to restructuring being delayed or prevented by virtue of settlement not being reached.

In practice, employers tend to await the resolution of redundancy disputes for mainly logistical reasons.   

In case of individual dismissal, the consultation process is, rather, a notification (with the exception of employees with enhanced protection; see question 11) including:

• the identity of the employee;
• termination grounds (redundancy); and
• basic details of the redundancy (why and when).

It should take place prior to the dismissal (no specific deadline is given).

In case of collective dismissal, the consultation process includes:

• measures preventing or limiting the collective dismissal;
• mitigation measures (eg, employing the redundant employee at other workplaces of the employer);
• reasons;
• number and professions of redundant employees;
• number and professions of all the employees;
• the period during which the collective dismissal takes place;
• selection method of redundant employees; and
• severance pay and other rights of the redundant employees.

The consultation process must take place no later than 30 days prior to the collective dismissal. The local Labour Office must be notified as well (see question 3).

The administrative fine for violation of the consultation process with unions is up to 200,000 koruna. Employees who suffer damage as a result may claim compensation.

Consultations should commence prior to the employee being made redundant, and as set out in more detail in question 2, an employer must consult with the employee, the WCC, and/or the labour organisation.

If settlement cannot be reached within seven days, the employer or employees may lodge a complaint with the LDSCB. If no settlement is reached at the LDSCB, the case should be referred to the LDSAB and either party (or both parties) can file a further claim with the LDSAC if dissatisfied with the decision of the LDSAB.

During the state of emergency in Myanmar, the filing of writs with the Union Supreme Court was temporarily suspended, and remains suspended at the time of writing. As a result, the final appeal previously available to a party dissatisfied with a LDSAC decision is not currently available.

As per the advice of the SLDL and labour officials, the employer must discuss any matter relating to the employee’s benefits with the employee before making them redundant.  

Remedies for failure to consult will only be discussed at the LDSCB if either party submits a complaint. According to Sections 46(b) and (c) of the SLDL, if the employer or employee fail to comply with their consultation obligations without proper reason on the date and time set by the WCC or LDSCB, the defaulting party shall be fined between 300,000 and 1 million kyats.   

Yes, an economic business rationale should be the reason for organisational change, and therefore the redundancy, and as such should be part of the consultation.

There is no law in Myanmar requiring an employer to present an economic business rationale as part of consultation. However, insofar as an employer would like to explain the economic business rationale for redundancy, it may do so.

In case of collective dismissals, if there are no unions or employee representatives, the employer must inform and directly consult the affected employees to the same extent.

In case of individual dismissal, it is not a requirement, nor best practice, and highly depends on the strategy in the individual case.

There are no requirements or best practices to consult with employees either individually or collectively. The consultation process as set out in question 2 must be followed, which includes consultation with the WCC, labour organisation, and employee representative, as applicable.

The only rule is that the employee’s position or work must be genuinely redundant (see question 1). If more than one employee fulfils this condition, it is up to the employer which employee to select. However, this choice must not indicate that there are in fact different motives for the redundancy of the selected employee (eg, disputes with the employer, unsatisfactory performance, or gender or other discriminatory motives).

While there are no laws or regulations on the selection of individual employees for redundancy, redundancy may not only affect a singular employee, but must be implemented for a group of employees, as stated in question 3.

Yes, a termination notice due to redundancy is not allowed during the period for which an employee is:

• declared temporarily medically unfit for work or in institutional treatment (unless the employee has intentionally caused this unfitness, or it is a direct consequence of the employee’s alcohol intoxication or substance abuse);
• deployed in military exercises or military service;
• on long-term full leave to act in public office;
• pregnant, or on maternity leave, paternity leave, or parental leave;
• declared temporarily unfit for night work if they perform night work; or
• on leave caring for a child under 10 years of age, treating a child under 10 years of age or other natural persons, or providing long-term care, all as specified in the Czech Sickness Insurance Act.

Section 27 of Leave and Holiday Rules states that an employee shall not be transferred, suspended, or dismissed during a leave period. Redundancy, as a form of dismissal, is then also prohibited during a leave period. Notably, in disputes referred to the LDSAB and LDSAC, employers have been ordered to reinstate dismissed employees to their former designations according to Section 25(a) of the Settlement of Labour Dispute Rules (SDLR), on the basis that the employers were discriminatory or biased in making the employees redundant.

Yes, members of a trade union body during their term of office and for a period of one year after the end of their term of office. The employer must have prior consent of the unions for termination of their employment relationship by a notice. Consent is deemed to be given if the unions don’t respond within 15 days. Consent is valid for two months. Termination notice without such consent is invalid unless the court decides in the validity case that the employer could not have been justifiably required to keep the employee.

As stated above, employees on leave may not be made redundant. In this regard, employees are entitled to six days of casual leave with full pay in every 12-month cycle, ten days of earned leave per year, 30 days of medical leave per a year, maternity leave of six weeks before delivery of child and eight weeks after delivery of child, and 15 days of paid paternity leave.

A redundant employee is entitled to a statutory severance payment, regardless of whether the employment termination is made by notice or agreement and if the redundancy is explicitly stated as the reason for the termination.

The severance payment is due on the next scheduled pay date following the termination of employment. A later due date can be agreed.

All terminated employees, whether due to redundancy or otherwise, except in the case of dismissal for an act of gross misconduct, are entitled to severance and must be provided with one month’s notice as prescribed in the EC. Section 35 of the SDLR further specifically provides that employees have a right to severance when an employer terminates its business. As a result, if employees are made redundant due to a business closure, they are entitled to a severance payment by virtue of Notification 84/2015 by the MOL. In addition, if the employer would like to make redundancy effective immediately, the employee is entitled to one month’s salary in lieu of notice. No other payment is required by law, except for those (i) agreed to between the employers and employees in the employment contract; or (ii) set out in the company’s policies or rules.

Although there are no periods specified in law for severance payments, the employer must pay due wages within two working days, pursuant to Section 4(d) of the Payment of Wages Law 2016, if the employee is terminated. No provision is made for when severance must be paid. In addition, if a dispute has been referred to the LDSAC or LDSAB, the employer must pay to the employee any amounts ordered within 30 days from the date of the decision.

The severance payment amount differs based on the length of the employment as follows:

• one gross average monthly salary of the employee if the employment lasted less than one year;
• two gross average monthly salaries of the employee if the employment lasted at least one year but less than two years; and
• three gross average monthly salaries of the employee if the employment lasted at least two years.

If the working hours account applies (specific working hours distribution scheme under the Czech Labour Code) the statutory severance is the relevant amount above plus three gross average monthly salaries of the employee.

The severance payment may also be higher if stated so by:

• agreement between the parties;
• the employer’s internal regulations; or
• a collective bargaining agreement.

A gross average monthly salary of the employee must be calculated for each employee separately using the specific rules of the Labour Code.

Notification 84/2015 stipulates that severance payment rates are based on the employee’s length of service as follows:

• less than six months of service: no severance payment is due;
• six months to one year of service: half of one month’s salary;
• one to two years of service: one month’s salary;
• two to three years of service: one and a half months’ salary;
• three to four years of service: three months’ salary;
• four to six years of service: four months’ salary;
• six to eight years of service: five months’ salary;
• eight to ten years of service: six months’ salary;
• ten to 20 years of service: eight months’ salary;
• 20 to 25 years of service: ten months’ salary; and
• over 25 years of service: 13 months’ salary.

Not in cases of individual dismissals.

In cases of collective dismissals, the employer must notify the relevant branch of the Labour Office:

• of the intention to carry out collective dismissal;
• that the consultation process has been initiated with the unions or the employees; and
• of the specific aspects of the collective dismissal, to the same extent as the unions (see question 6).

Following the consultation, the employer must deliver a written report to the Labour Office stating:

• that the employer has decided on collective redundancies;
• the outcome of the consultation process;
• the number and occupational composition of all employees; and
• the number and occupational composition of the employees to be made redundant.

A copy of the report must be delivered to the unions, which then have the right to comment on it.

There is no legal requirement for employers to notify local, regional, or national governments or regulators before making redundancies.

No, generally there is no such obligation. If the conditions for dismissal due to redundancy are met, the employer is not obliged to offer the employee an alternative solution.

However, in some specific individual cases, the courts have concluded that if the employer still needs the work on part-time basis, the employer should first offer the employee this part-time job.

There is no formal provision in law that an employer has an obligation to consider alternatives to redundancy. However, as the unemployment rate in Myanmar is high, labour officers and the officials of the LDSAB and LDSAC have previously requested that employers consider suitable alternative employment for their employees.

There are no specific notification obligations after making the redundancies. Only general notification obligations, which are the same for all employment terminations, apply.

These general notifications must be made within eight days, using the relevant forms, to: (i) the employee’s health insurance company; and (ii) the District Social Security Administration (including the pension insurance record sheet).

If wage deductions were made to satisfy the employee’s debt to a third party, the employer must notify the relevant court (or tax authority case of tax debt), including an account of the deductions.

As redundancy is a form of termination of an employment contract, the employer must inform the DOL of the redundancy. Additionally, if the matter is settled through the WCC, the WCC will require the employer to submit a report to the LDSCB.

An employee may challenge the validity of a dismissal for redundancy if they consider that the statutory conditions were not met. First, the employee who wishes to remain employed must inform the employer without undue delay after the termination notice that they insist on continuing their employment. Second, the employee must file a lawsuit at the district court of the employer’s seat (residence or registered address). The lawsuit must be made within two months from the date on which the employment should have ended. After the two months, the right to file the lawsuit expires.

If the dismissal for redundancy is found invalid, the employee who wishes to remain employed remains to be employed at the original position under the original conditions and is entitled to a full compensation of salary for the whole time from the invalid termination until work is assigned again, or until the employment is validly terminated (ie, including the time of the court proceedings). The court may reduce the amount of such compensation if, for example, the employee has found another job in the interim, or could have found one.

There’s no statutory authorisation for unions to raise any claims at the court on behalf of employees except for insolvency proceedings (see question 21). However, only attorneys at law can represent employees fully and without limits in any proceedings. Another natural person can be granted a power of attorney in a specific case (not repeatedly). Theoretically, this could be a member or employee of the unions, but this is not a market standard.

As mentioned in question 6, an employee who has been made redundant may lodge a complaint with the township LDSCB. If a resolution cannot be reached at the LDSCB, the case should be transferred to the LDSAB. Either party (or both parties) can then submit a subsequent claim with the LDSAC if they are dissatisfied with the LDSAB’s ruling. In addition, the labour laws allow a representative of the labour organisation, or the representative of the employee, to claim on their behalf.

In proceedings at the LDSAB and LDSAC, a dissatisfied employee terminated on the basis of redundancy can claim reinstatement to their former position or to another suitable position, and damages for the period of unemployment.

Yes, it is very common and highly recommended to terminate the employment by mutual agreement when making employees redundant. The termination agreement does not have to state any reasons for termination. However, should the reason be redundancy of the employee, the employee is entitled to statutory severance payment regardless. To motivate the employees to conclude the termination agreement, it is a market standard to offer a higher severance package than the statutory severance payment.

In practice, settlement agreements are not commonly used when making employees redundant. However, once an employer and employee reach agreement regarding redundancy, it is typically reduced to writing.

Individual redundancies generally take around two to three months. The organisational change must be prepared, and the termination agreement negotiated or the termination notice given. In case of the notice, the statutory notice period is two months. There’s no statutory notice period requirement in case of agreement, therefore it can be faster. It can also take longer (eg, more complicated cases, restructuring, C-level or other higher managers).

For collective redundancies, the process takes several months (at least three) due to higher demands on preparation, more complicated structuring, the consultation process, and the notification obligation to the Labour Office.

The duration of the redundancy process can vary greatly depending on the specific circumstances of each case, largely due to a lack of laws and regulations governing redundancy. It may take several weeks or even months to complete, depending on the level of cooperation between the employer and employee, the complexity of the issue, and whether or not disputes arise that require the involvement of labour dispute resolution bodies such as LDSCB, LDSAB, or LDSAC. If agreement is reached quickly, the process may be shorter, while a failure to reach a settlement and subsequent pursuit of legal remedies can significantly prolong the process. Additionally, the possibility of a lock-out or strike can also impact the timeline. Therefore, it is difficult to provide a precise timeframe for completing the redundancy process.

The statutory law does not expressly prohibit certain conduct. However, a redundancy means that the employee’s work is no longer needed and therefore any hiring (internal or external) for the same (or largely the same) position should be avoided (or at least thoroughly considered), especially for the two-month period during which the employee can challenge the validity of the dismissal.

There are no statutory limitations on operating a business after a redundancy, and employers are generally free to hire new employees or rehire previous employees at their discretion.

The term “restructuring” in Czech law means one of the ways of resolving a company’s bankruptcy in insolvency proceedings. During this process, organisational changes including redundancies may occur. This kind of restructuring does not require unions’ consent; however, consultation may be required. Further, unions may represent the employees in insolvency proceedings.

In Czech law, “restructuring” within the meaning of a business transaction or corporate transformation or changes (i.e. not a type of insolvency proceeding) can also lead to transfer of rights and obligations from the employment relationship to another employer (transfer of undertakings), ie, the employee and their employment will be transferred to a new employer as a result of such transaction. In this case, the employer must inform the unions or other representatives (and if there are none, then the individual employees) and consult at least 30 days in advance:

• the effective date of the transfer;
• reasons for the transfer;
• legal, economic, and social consequences of the transfer for the employees; and
• measures to be taken in relation to the employees.

In case of cross-border mergers or spin-offs, the employer also must: (i) inform the employees or unions of their right to get acquainted with the written merger or spin-off project and give written comments on it; and (ii) generally reach agreement with unions regarding the extent and manner of the right of influence of the employees of the successor corporation (for example, in certain cases by electing a certain number of members of supervisory board in a joint stock company) if the seat of the newly formed entity is supposed to be in the Czechia. Further corporate obligations depend on the form of such restructuring.

However, the described labour law obligations don’t apply in the case of mere ownership change of the employer’s company where this has no direct legal implications for the employees (ie, it isn’t a transfer of undertaking or a termination reason).

While there is no explicit requirement for employee consultation or consent in relation to major transactions such as business transfers, mergers, acquisitions, disposals, or joint ventures, even where a WCC exists, the officers of the DOL recommend that employers discuss business operations with their employees after a major transaction, particularly regarding their willingness to continue working for the company. It is important to note that the WCC is established to discuss and negotiate matters concerning employee benefits, but it does not have the authority to intervene in the employer’s management or business matters.  

In general, employees have limited ability to influence the process of business transactions. The consultation process (see question 21) doesn’t have to result in an agreement with or of the unions. The administrative fine for violation of the consultation process is up to 200,000 Czech Koruna. If there are no unions and the employer breaches its information obligation towards the individual employees (see question 21), the law provides no administrative penalty. In each case, the employee could claim compensation for damage if any damage occurred.

If an employer fails to comply with its consultation duties, employees can submit a complaint to the LDSCB. The LDSCB may then summon the parties to appear before it and attempt to settle the dispute.

According to Sections 46(b) and (c) of SLDL, if either of the parties fail to comply with their consultation obligations on the date and time set by the WCC or LDSCB without proper reason, the defaulting party shall be liable to a fine ranging from 300,000 to 1 million kyats.

There are no legal provisions enabling employees to prevent business operations from proceeding.   

If the statutory conditions for transfer are met, the transfer occurs automatically, ie, neither the original employer, the new employer, the employees, nor the unions can avoid the transfer. An employee may prevent their own transfer only by serving termination notice to the employer before the transfer’s effective date, in which case the employment terminates on the day immediately preceding the transfer’s effective date at the latest. If the employer didn’t inform employee at least 30 days in advance (see question 21), the employee may serve their termination notice within two months after the transfer’s effective date – in which case, only a 15-day notice period applies.

Individual rights and obligations are transferred in full to the new employer. The rights and obligations under the original employer’s collective agreement are also transferred to the new employer, but only for the duration of the collective agreement, and for no longer than to the end of the following calendar year.

Transfer itself is not a statutory reason for terminating the employment. However, a restructuring (organisation change) leading to redundancy may happen before, during, or following the transfer. In such a case, the employee has the same rights as in the case of other redundancies.

If the employee terminates the employment by a notice or by an agreement within two months of the effective date of the transfer, they may raise a claim at court that the reason for termination was a substantial deterioration in working conditions caused by the transfer. If the court confirms it, the employee will be entitled to statutory severance (see question 13).

There is limited protection of employees on a business transfer, and a transferring employer can dismiss employees as a result of a business transfer, provided that the employer complies with the usual provisions concerning notice periods and severance pay. Accordingly, an employment contract will remain valid after the business transfer, unless it is terminated with severance by the employer.

In practice, the DOL suggests that an employer discusses an intended transfer with its employees to determine whether they would like to continue employment after the business transfer. Employees who wish to continue working after a business transfer will keep their original appointment date and be eligible for severance pay based on their continuous service with the employer. If the employer terminates employment due to the transfer, the employee is entitled to severance pay based on their length of service as at the date of the termination. If the employer offers re-employment and the employee accepts, a new appointment date will be set.

Since the transfer of rights and obligations under employment law occurs automatically, it is generally sufficient to follow the legally prescribed procedure for a given business transfer. In addition, it is necessary to comply with the information and consultation obligation (see question 21). Further, general reporting and notification obligations to the state authorities apply.

There is no prescribed procedure for a transfer of employment. According to labour officials, the employer should inform the DOL with a cover letter containing the number of employees who remain employed and the number of employees who were terminated with severance. In addition, if the employer and employee enter into a new employment contract, it must be registered at the DOL. 

The working conditions of the transferred employees cannot substantially worsen. If this were to happen and the employee gave termination notice within two months of the transfer, the employee could claim statutory severance (see question 23).

In addition, the employer must comply with the general principle of equal treatment and ensure equal treatment of both the original and new employees in terms of their working conditions, remuneration, and other benefits, training, and the possibility of promotion.

There are no statutory rules or guidelines on harmonising the transferring employees’ terms of employment with the existing employees’ terms of employment. Although the Labour Law does not specifically address this issue, it does provide that employers must treat all employees fairly and equally. This means that employers should not discriminate against transferring employees by offering them less favourable terms of employment than existing employees.

In practice, it is common for employers to harmonise the terms of employment of transferring employees with the terms of employment of existing employees to avoid disputes.

If the hours, pay, or benefits are agreed in the employment or other contract, then no unilateral change can be made.

Working hours – either statutory weekly working hours apply (40 hours per week) or shorter working hours are agreed. In either case, the employer determines the distribution unilaterally (subject to complying with statutory rules and limits) unless agreed differently.

Salary – if it isn’t agreed in the employment or other contract, the employer unilaterally determines the salary by an internal regulation or by a salary statement.

Benefits – if they aren’t agreed in the employment or other contract, the employer unilaterally determines the benefits by an internal regulation or by a salary statement.

An employer is permitted to reduce working hours due to a lack of work. Ordinary working hours are normally set at eight hours per day, or 44 or 48 hours per week, according to the nature of the work. Ordinary weekly working hours must not exceed 48 hours. 

An employer is not permitted to unilaterally reduce salaries. An employer can, however, reduce salaries with the consent of the employee, and due to crisis or economic hardships.

An employer may not reduce statutory benefits under Myanmar labour laws, such as paid leave, overtime payment, and severance payment. However, if there is a valid reason, the employer may reduce non-statutory employee benefits.

As for employment terms and conditions in general, if these have been agreed in the employment or other contract, they can be changed only by agreement. Validity of express contractual provision to vary the conditions depends on its structure and which conditions it concerns, and therefore there’s no generally applicable answer to the question.

The Labour Code further allows, in certain cases, a change in type of work, workplace, or employer by a temporary transfer of an employee to a different work position, workplace, or employer. Generally, consent is required; however, in certain cases, the employer can (and in very specific cases, has to) make a temporary transfer unilaterally (for example, if the employee is medically unfit to perform the agreed type of work, or to avert imminent danger). The employer must adhere to strict statutory conditions.

In Myanmar, the standard EC terms mandated by the MOL can only be changed with the authorisation of the Directorate of Labour, save for the employee designation, salary, period of employment, etc. An employer may also implement workplace rules and regulations (subject to applicable laws), which shall be deemed an integral part of the EC. Further, once an employment contract has been entered into, the terms open to modification may only be changed by agreement between the employer and employee.

Yes, the employee and the employer may agree on certain changes and variations implicitly. However, it is recommended to avoid such situations.

Changes to employee benefits may only be made in consultation with the WCC. And while there are no legal provisions in Myanmar expressly prohibiting or permitting changes to employment terms by implied conduct, in practice, such changes are uncommon.

If agreement is required to vary an employment term or condition, then the only option to vary it is an agreement.

If the employer wishes to amend a term and the parties cannot reach agreement, either party may lodge a complaint with the LDSCB, LDSAB, or LDSAC, pursuant to the SLDL and SLDR.

Further, clause 21(b) of the EC states that, if it is required by the nature of the work, the employer may unilaterally implement the template workplace rules and regulations as provided by the MOL, which comply with the applicable laws and shall be deemed an integral part of the EC. Accordingly, terms related to workplace conduct may be altered by the employer by way of these rules and regulations. Any proposed amendment to the template workplace rules and regulations must remain compliant with relevant laws and must be agreed to between the employer and employee.

If a dispute relating to the workplace rules and regulations arises, both parties have the right to lodge a complaint with the LDSCB, LDSAB, and LDSAC.

If varied unilaterally in a case where agreement was required, the employee may challenge the variation (depending on the situation, by demanding the employer to: refrain from such conduct, restore the original terms, or compensate the employee for the damage caused by such conduct). Depending on the situation there could also be a risk of administrative penalties.

Other than by way of implementing workplace rules and regulations, which may not contravene any applicable laws, an employer is prohibited from amending an employment term unilaterally, and failure to comply will be considered a violation of the EC, punishable by imprisonment of not more than three months, a fine, or both, according to Section 39 of the Employment and Skill Development Law. If an employee is dissatisfied with the workplace rules and regulations unilaterally implemented by the employer, the employee may lodge a complaint with the LDSCB. If there is no settlement between the parties at the LDSCB, then the matter may be referred to the LDSAB, who will consider whether the rules and/or regulations are in accord with existing labour laws.   

The Czech parliament is currently debating several changes in the area of labour law. However, none of the currently debated changes should affect the answers above.

Despite the state of emergency and the associated restrictions in Myanmar, there have been no modifications to the underlying laws, and the country continues to operate under the same legal framework that was in place prior to the declaration of the state of emergency.

According to a report by the International Labour Organization published in 2020, the MOL has been reviewing the Employment and Skill Development Law to align it with international labour standards and address the changing needs of the labour market. The proposed amendments aim to improve the protection of workers’ rights, promote equal opportunities, and enhance the enforcement mechanism of the law.

The amendments are expected to introduce provisions related to the maximum duration of employment contracts, which would provide greater job security for workers. Additionally, the amendments would seek to strengthen the protection afforded to pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers, including measures to prevent discrimination against them in the workplace. In addition, since 2017, the MOL has been preparing the draft Employment and Skill Development Rules, but these have not yet been published.