Scenario: a warehouse worker was disciplined last year with a 6-month wage-rise deferment for damaging goods. Last month he damaged goods again the same way. HR asks: “Can we dismiss him now?” The answer is yes — but only if the first discipline, the time limits, and the procedure all check out. Repeat-offense dismissal (Article 125.4) is powerful and frequently botched.
The legal ground (Article 125.4, Labor Code 2019)
Dismissal as a disciplinary measure applies where the employee repeats an offense for which they already received a wage-rise deferment or demotion, while the disciplinary record has not yet been expunged. “Repeat” means committing the same category of violation already disciplined — not any new misconduct. The expungement periods (Article 126): reprimand is expunged after 3 months; wage-rise deferment and demotion after 6 months — provided no further violation in that time. A “repeat” after expungement is a first offense again.
Three conditions that must all hold
1) The first discipline was lawful: proper grounds, within the statute of limitations (Article 122), correct procedure (Article 127) — if the first decision was void, there is nothing to “repeat”. 2) The record is unexpunged: count from the effective date of the first decision; 6 months for deferment/demotion. 3) The second act qualifies: same category of violation, committed while the record stands. Miss any one and the dismissal collapses — courts examine repeat-offense dismissals closely because the sanction is the harshest available.
Procedure still applies in full
Repeat-offense dismissal must follow the full Article 127 procedure: disciplinary council, the employee’s right to defend themselves (personally or through counsel/union), written minutes, and a written dismissal decision stating the repeated violation and the unexpunged prior discipline. Skipping the council because “it’s obvious” is the classic error that annuls the dismissal.
FAQs
1. First discipline was a reprimand, second offense same type — dismissal?
No. Repeat-offense dismissal requires the prior discipline to have been wage-rise deferment or demotion — a reprimand does not qualify.
2. Repeat occurred 7 months after a 6-month deferment — dismissal?
No — the record was expunged at 6 months (with no intervening violation). The new act is a first offense.
3. Different misconduct the second time — dismissal?
Not under Article 125.4 (which needs the same category). The new act is assessed on its own — it may independently justify dismissal under Article 125.1–125.3 if it fits those grounds.
4. Must the internal regulations list the specific repeat scenario?
The regulations must define violations and corresponding sanctions; the repeat-offense mechanism itself comes from the statute. Keep the regulations precise.
5. Employee claims the first discipline was unfair — defense?
They should have challenged it when issued. But if the first decision was procedurally void, the repeat-offense basis fails — which is why getting the first discipline right matters.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council