Issue 110326 – Wages during work suspension

Dear Valued Clients,

In employment relations, wages are not merely remuneration for labor but also the primary source of income ensuring the livelihood of employees and their families. In practice, various situations arise in which employees are unable to perform their work—due to the employer’s fault, objective causes, or the employee’s own fault—while the employment relationship remains in effect. The institution of wages during work suspension was established to regulate such specific circumstances.

This article analyzes the legal grounds, content, and practical application of the provisions on wages during work suspension under the 2019 Labor Code (the “Labor Code”) and its guiding instruments. It also highlights issues that enterprises should consider when applying these provisions, thereby contributing to the mitigation of legal risks and safeguarding the lawful rights and interests of the parties in employment relationships.

1. Concept and legal basis

1.1. Concept of Wages During Work Suspension

Wages during work suspension refer to the amount that an employer is required to pay an employee during the period in which the employee must temporarily cease working for certain legally recognized reasons. Unlike wages paid for completed work, wages during work suspension arise in circumstances where the employee does not perform work but remains bound by a valid employment contract. From a legal perspective, this mechanism constitutes a risk-allocation tool within employment relations. When production activities are disrupted, the law determines financial responsibility based on fault or the objective nature of the event.

1.2. Legal Basis

The provisions on wages during work suspension are primarily set out in Article 99 of the 2019 Labor Code¹. In addition, the determination of the minimum wage applicable in certain suspension cases is governed by Government decrees prescribing regional minimum wages applicable to employees working under employment contracts². These instruments serve to guarantee the minimum rights of employees when their income is interrupted.

2. Cases of work suspension and wage payment mechanisms

Article 99 of the Labor Code categorizes cases of work suspension according to their causes and establishes corresponding wage payment obligations.

2.1. Work Suspension Due to the Employer’s Fault

Where work suspension results from the employer’s fault, the employee is entitled to receive full wages as stipulated in the employment contract³.

The employer’s fault may include deficiencies in organizing, managing, and operating production activities, such as ineffective production planning, failure to ensure the supply of raw materials, failure to conduct periodic maintenance leading to machinery breakdown, or inappropriate managerial decisions directly affecting employees’ work and income.

Requiring the employer to pay full wages in such cases reflects the fundamental civil law principle that a party at fault must bear the corresponding legal consequences. In the employment context, employees who are ready and willing to perform their contractual obligations should not suffer income reduction due to the employer’s managerial shortcomings.

2.2. Work Suspension Due to the Employee’s Fault

Where suspension arises from the employee’s fault, the law distinguishes between the employee directly at fault and other employees affected by the incident.

The employee whose fault causes the suspension is not entitled to wages during the suspension period⁴. For other employees who must suspend work due to the incident but are not at fault, the parties may agree on the suspension wage, provided that it is not lower than the statutory minimum wage.

This mechanism protects the minimum rights of employees who are not at fault while preventing unreasonable collective liability within the enterprise.

In practice, however, determining fault and the degree thereof may give rise to disputes, particularly in production lines or highly integrated operational systems where incidents may stem from multiple factors. Enterprises should therefore establish clear internal procedures, objective verification mechanisms, and ensure employees’ right to provide explanations in order to mitigate legal risks.

2.3. Work Suspension Due to Objective Causes

This category is both common and sensitive in practice, as suspension results from factors beyond the parties’ control, such as power or water outages not attributable to either party, natural disasters, fires, epidemics, or economic difficulties.

Pursuant to Article 99.3 of the Labor Code, wages during suspension in such cases are subject to agreement between the parties but must comply with the following principles:

• If the suspension lasts 14 working days or fewer, the wage must not be lower than the statutory minimum wage;
• If the suspension exceeds 14 working days, wages for the first 14 days must not be lower than the statutory minimum wage; from the 15th day onward, wages are subject to the parties’ agreement⁵.

This regulatory design reflects a balance between two policy objectives: ensuring a minimum standard of living for employees in cases of objective risks, and sharing financial burdens with enterprises facing unexpected business difficulties. The practical significance of this mechanism was particularly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, when it helped maintain employment relationships and reduce mass terminations.

3. Principles of application and emerging legal issues

Three fundamental principles may be derived from the current regulations.

First, the principle of fault-based responsibility allocation. Fault is the central criterion for distributing financial obligations.

Second, the principle of guaranteeing a minimum standard of living for employees. The establishment of a statutory “floor” based on the regional minimum wage reflects the clear social orientation of Vietnamese labor law⁶.

Third, the principle of conditional agreement. The law allows the parties flexibility within protective limits, thereby respecting contractual freedom while preventing erosion of employees’ bargaining position.

Nevertheless, practical application raises several concerns:

• Difficulties in proving fault;
• The risk of employers invoking “objective causes” to reduce labor costs;
• Imbalances in bargaining power, especially during periods of economic hardship.

4. Practical considerations for enterprises

While the Labor Code’s provisions on wages during work suspension are generally considered balanced, enterprises should pay particular attention to the following matters in order to minimize legal risks:

• Clarifying the cause and fault elements when suspension occurs. In complex production systems, identifying fault may be challenging. Enterprises should develop clear internal investigation procedures and maintain comprehensive records as evidence in potential disputes.
• Enhancing the role of employee representative organizations in negotiations. In cases of suspension due to objective causes, wages are largely based on agreement. Proactive consultation with grassroots trade unions or employee representatives can help achieve transparent consensus and reduce future complaints.
• Ensuring compliance with statutory minimum wage requirements. Even in difficult circumstances, enterprises must comply with the legally prescribed minimum levels where required. Payment below the minimum wage may result in administrative sanctions, back-pay obligations, and reputational damage.
• Proactively managing operational risks. Strengthening production management capacity, conducting regular technical maintenance, securing supply chains, and periodically assessing legal risks can reduce suspension incidents attributable to managerial fault.

5. Conclusion

Wages during work suspension constitute an important legal mechanism for allocating risks in employment relationships when production activities are disrupted. By distinguishing responsibility based on fault while guaranteeing a minimum income level for employees, Vietnamese labor law demonstrates a clear orientation toward protection and balanced interests among the parties.

In an increasingly volatile economic environment, further refinement and effective enforcement of this institution are essential for maintaining labor market stability.

As always, we hope our clients find this article informative and look forward to working with you in the future.

Sincerelly,

ENT Law LLC

1. Article 99, 2019 Labor Code.

2. Decree No. 293/2025/ND-CP dated November 10, 2025, prescribing minimum wages for employees working under employment contracts.Regional Minimum Wage Levels:

3. Article 99.1, 2019 Labor Code.

4. Article 99.2, 2019 Labor Code.

5. Article 99.3, 2019 Labor Code.

6. See also Article 91, 2019 Labor Code regarding the role of minimum wages.