← Back to services

Labor & Employment Disputes

Specialized support for dismissal, severance, and employment contract disputes under Taiwan labor law

Taiwan’s severance rules differ from Korea’s in both qualifying grounds and calculation methods. The legal basis for ending the contract, service under the new and old systems, notice requirements, and statutory time limits must be reviewed separately. We advise Korean employers and employees on dismissal, severance, and employment-contract disputes in Taiwan.

This page is reviewed by Attorney Wei Tseng and connects related columns with the consultation flow.

Key Points

  • Ending an employment contract in Taiwan cannot be reduced to three universal categories of economic dismissal, disciplinary dismissal, and voluntary resignation. Distinguish an employer termination with notice under Article 11 of the Labor Standards Act, a termination without notice under Article 12, a worker termination without notice under Article 14, and expiry of a fixed-term contract; the contract type, legal ground, and procedure determine notice, severance, and required documentation.
  • Severance must be calculated separately for service covered by Taiwan’s new and old systems. For service under the new system, a contract ending on a statutory qualifying ground generally produces one-half month of average wage per year, prorated for partial years and capped at six months of average wage. Old-system service generally starts from one month of average wage per year, subject to its own partial-period rules. Mixed service requires each period to be identified and calculated under the applicable system.
  • Article 14 permits a worker to terminate without notice on grounds including unpaid wages, violence or serious insult by the employer side, failure to make necessary improvements to work that may harm health, or an employer breach of the contract or labor law that may prejudice the worker’s rights. The 30-day limit applies only to paragraph 1, subparagraphs 1 and 6. In both cases, the period runs from knowledge of the relevant circumstances; for subparagraph 6, if a harmful result occurs, the worker may also terminate within 30 days after learning of that result. The applicable subparagraph and trigger date must therefore be identified.
  • Under Article 15-1, a minimum-service-period clause needs one of two alternative statutory bases: employer-funded professional skills training or reasonable compensation for the worker’s commitment. A separate reasonable-scope review then considers training duration and cost, availability of replacement personnel, the amount and scope of compensation, and other circumstances; a clause that fails either stage is void. If employment ends early for a reason not attributable to the worker, the worker is not liable for breach of the clause or reimbursement of training expenses.
  • Preserve employment contracts, work rules, pay statements and remittance records, attendance and overtime records, evaluations, transfer, pay-cut or termination notices, email, and chat data lawfully in their original form with verifiable dates and sources, then arrange them chronologically. Recording is not invariably lawful or admissible; participation in the conversation, acquisition method, privacy and communications secrecy, internal policies, and intended use require individual review. Avoid unauthorized account access or device placement, alteration of data, and excessive removal of trade secrets or personal data.
  • Resignation notice is distinct from the validity of a minimum-service-period clause and from repayment liability. For an indefinite-term contract, Article 15 applies the notice periods in Article 16(1): 10 days’ notice for service of at least three months but less than one year, 20 days’ notice for service of at least one year but less than three years, and 30 days’ notice for service of at least three years. Service under three months, other fixed-term contracts, and statutory no-notice grounds require separate review of the contract type and governing provision.