An employer issues workplace rules, posts them at the office and dismisses an employee under those rules — but the rules were never registered with the labour authority. When the employee sues, the decisive question is whether rules without legal effect can support a dismissal. This article clarifies the registration process and effectiveness of workplace rules, the consequences of dismissal under unregistered rules, and how an employer repairs its rule system.
Registration is the effectiveness condition of workplace rules
Under Article 119 of the Labour Code, an employer using 10 or more employees must issue written internal labour rules and register them with the specialised labour agency of the provincial People’s Committee where the business is registered. Within 10 days of issuance, the employer must file the registration dossier; the labour authority reviews the content and requires amendment of any unlawful provisions. Under Article 121, the rules take effect 15 days after the authority receives a complete valid dossier, if it issues no amendment request.
The practical meaning is that until registration is validly completed, the document is only an internal paper without legal effect for discipline. Employers below 10 staff are not obliged to register but must still express the main disciplinary contents in labour contracts or in rules publicised and agreed with employees; employers of 10 or more have no such exception. Many newly established FDI employers dismiss staff in their first year under rules translated from a group template that was never registered — the group most exposed to this risk.
Dismissal under ineffective rules is unlawful termination
Labour discipline, especially dismissal, may rest only on violations prescribed in workplace rules in effect at the time of the employee’s act, together with other statutory bases. Applying unregistered, ineffective rules to dismiss means the employer has no valid disciplinary basis, and the dismissal is determined as unlawful unilateral termination under the consequences of Article 41 of the Labour Code: the employer must reinstate the employee, pay wages and insurance for the period not worked, plus compensation of at least two months’ wages.
In court and mediation, employers commonly lose at exactly this first check, before any examination of whether the employee’s conduct deserved dismissal — a consequence many HR managers do not foresee. A dismissed employee should ask the employer to produce the applied rules and their registration evidence; where no valid registration file exists, the case is nearly decided at that point. Conversely, where rules are validly registered and the conduct falls within dismissal grounds, the employer must still follow the correct disciplinary procedure including time limits, evidence and participation of the employee representative organisation.
Remedy: registering now and handling decisions already issued
An employer discovering unregistered rules should do two things in parallel. First, perfect the rules’ content against current law — reviewing dismissal grounds, disciplinary time limits, working and rest time, occupational safety and workplace harassment prevention — then file the registration and track it until the rules take effect under Article 121. Second, review disciplinary decisions already issued on the ineffective rules, especially dismissals still within the claim period, and consider proactive settlements such as agreed withdrawal of the decision or agreed compensation to close the legal risk.
Systemically, registration of workplace rules belongs on the mandatory legal checklist at establishment or whenever rules change, with one owner tracking the effective date and filing the registration dossier alongside the rule set. Every rules update — shift changes, added disciplinary grounds, new asset and confidentiality provisions — needs the corresponding amendment and supplementary registration procedure; using rules registered years ago for conduct the registered version never prescribed is another variant of the same risk.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are unregistered workplace rules legally effective?
No. For employers with 10 or more employees, rules must be registered with the provincial labour authority within 10 days of issuance under Article 119 of the Labour Code, and take effect 15 days after the authority receives a complete valid dossier without amendment requests, under Article 121. Until registration is completed, the rules have no effect as a disciplinary basis.
What happens to a dismissal based on unregistered rules?
The dismissal lacks a valid disciplinary basis and is determined as unlawful contract termination. Under Article 41 of the Labour Code, the employer must reinstate the employee, pay wages and insurance contributions for the period not worked, and compensate at least two months’ wages, with further consequences where the parties do not continue the employment relationship.
How do employers under 10 staff discipline without registered rules?
Employers below 10 employees are not obliged to issue and register rules under that procedure, but the main disciplinary contents must be agreed in the labour contract or clearly prescribed and publicised to employees. Discipline still rests only on previously agreed, publicised bases and must follow the statutory disciplinary procedure.
What should an employer do immediately upon finding its rules unregistered?
Perfect the rules against current law and file the registration at once, tracking it to the effective date. In parallel review disciplinary decisions — especially dismissals — issued on the ineffective rules and still within the claim period, to settle proactively by agreed withdrawal or compensation rather than waiting for the employee to sue.
Practical recommendations
Registering workplace rules is a cheap, quick procedure compared with the price of a dismissal declared unlawful. Employers should check the registration status and effective date of the rules they are using today, and treat every disciplinary decision as a transaction that will be re-examined by the court’s very first question: were these rules in effect on the day the employee acted?
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council