Short answer — and it may run counter to many people’s intuition: under current law, the disciplinary authority and procedure for reprimand and demotion are IDENTICAL. The law provides no separate authority for demotion, nor any simplified procedure for reprimand. The two forms differ only in severity, subjects of application and the expungement period (03 months for reprimand, 03 years for demotion — Article 126.1 of the 2019 Labor Code).
1. Quick comparison table
| Criterion | Reprimand | Demotion |
|---|---|---|
| Disciplinary authority | Person competent to conclude labor contracts / person designated in the internal labor regulations (point i, clause 2, Art. 69 of Decree 145/2020) | IDENTICAL — the law provides no separate authority |
| Procedure | Art. 122 Labor Code + Art. 70 Decree 145: record the violation → 05-day notice → hold a meeting → issue a written decision | IDENTICAL — no simplified procedure for reprimand |
| Severity | Lightest (clause 1, Art. 124 Labor Code) | Third of four forms (clause 3, Art. 124) |
| Subjects | All employees | Employees holding a position or title (per practice and the logic of this form) |
| Expungement | 03 months (clause 1, Art. 126) | 03 years (clause 1, Art. 126) |
| Repeat violation | — | Repeat violation before expungement → may be dismissed (clause 3, Art. 125) |
| Limitation period | 06 months (12 months for finance/asset/secrecy-related acts) | Identical (Art. 123) |
2. Analysis of each difference (and non-difference)
Authority: one common rule for both
Point i, clause 2, Article 69 of Decree 145/2020/ND-CP requires internal labor regulations to designate the person competent to handle labor discipline — usually the person competent to conclude labor contracts. This rule applies generally, without distinguishing reprimand from demotion. Hence the view that “demotion must be decided by a higher level” is wrong — unless the company’s own internal regulations say so, the law does not require it.
Procedure: no “shortcut” for reprimand
Article 122 of the 2019 Labor Code (principles and procedure for handling discipline) and Article 70 of Decree 145/2020 set a uniform procedure: record the violation → give 05 working days’ notice → hold a disciplinary meeting (employee, employee representative organization, competent person) → issue a written decision. This procedure applies to all forms of discipline. The notion that “a reprimand only needs a verbal reminder, no meeting” is wrong and very risky: a reprimand decision issued without proper procedure may be declared void when the employee files a complaint (Article 131).
Severity and subjects: the real differences
Article 124 of the Labor Code lists four disciplinary forms in ascending severity: reprimand (lightest) → wage-raise postponement of up to 06 months → demotion → dismissal (heaviest). Reprimand applies to all employees; demotion — by the very logic of this form — is only meaningful for employees holding a position or title (someone holding no position has nothing to be demoted from). Note: this follows from practice and the nature of the form; the law does not expressly state “demotion applies only to position-holders”.
Expungement and repeat violations: very different long-term consequences
An employee given a reprimand is expunged after 03 months; a demoted employee must wait 03 years (clause 1, Article 126). A repeat violation before expungement may lead a demoted employee to dismissal under clause 3, Article 125. The limitation period for handling discipline is 06 months from the violation (12 months for acts directly related to finance, assets, technology or business secrets) — identical for both forms (Article 123).
3. Practical notes
- The costliest mistake: handling a reprimand “quickly” with a verbal reminder, no record, no meeting. When the employee complains, a procedurally flawed disciplinary decision risks annulment — and the company loses its very basis for addressing the violation.
- Review internal labor regulations: the regulations must name the person competent to handle discipline (point i, clause 2, Art. 69 of Decree 145). Missing this content flaws the authority of every disciplinary decision.
- Do not confuse with public-employee discipline: the disciplinary regime for public employees (reprimand, warning, demotion, etc.) under Decree 112/2020/ND-CP with 12/24-month expungement periods is a completely different regime, inapplicable to enterprise employees under the Labor Code.
- Prohibited acts in handling discipline (Art. 127): infringing the employee’s health, honor or dignity; imposing fines or wage deductions instead of discipline; disciplining employees during periods where the law prohibits it (e.g. pregnant employees, employees on maternity leave).
4. Conclusion
Reprimand and demotion are identical in authority and procedure — the key point this article’s title raises and the law answers clearly: no separate authority, no simplified procedure. The two forms differ only in the corresponding severity of violations, subjects of application and expungement periods (03 months vs 03 years, with repeat violations leading to dismissal). Following the full procedure even for a reprimand is the only way a disciplinary decision survives a complaint.
Need internal labor regulations or disciplinary handling? FLAT Law Firm advises on building internal labor regulations and supports disciplinary procedures under the 2019 Labor Code and Decree 145/2020. Contact us at contact us.
Information in this article is for general reference under the laws in force at the time of writing (14/10/2026) and is not legal advice for any specific case.
Transparency note: This article was drafted by FLAT Law Firm’s AI content production system and has passed the AI content review council (AI Legal Council QA). It has not been reviewed by a human lawyer.
