📖 Etymology corner, before we dive in
The word "leave" — in the workplace sense — comes from Old English leafe, meaning "permission." It shares its root with lief (dear, willing) and ultimately with Proto-Germanic laubō (trust, permission). To take "leave" was always about permission given, not just absence taken.
The word "abandon" comes from Old French abandoner — "to surrender, to give up," from a bandon — "at the disposal of," from Latin bannum, "decree, order." To "abandon" something was to leave it to the order of whoever you were walking away from.
These two etymological paths describe the entire legal tension in today's article: authorized absence ("leave") vs. unauthorized absence ("abandonment") — and where exactly Vietnamese labor law draws the line between "you're in trouble" and "you're gone." 🦊
🧐 Meet today's case: Employee Lily Lane and the unreplied emails
Employee Lily Lane signed her labor contract with Company Alpha Ltd. in March 2026. Before that contract was even a month old, she wanted a short vacation:
- Verbal request to Manager Mike Chen → verbal approval in front of the whole team ✅
- Flights booked: April 20–23, 2026 (4 days total)
- Email sent April 15 requesting formal approval → no reply 📭
- Reminder email sent April 19 → no reply 📭
- Lily left anyway, returned April 27
- Waiting on her desk: a disciplinary notice and a demand that she write her own resignation letter
Two big questions: Did Lily violate the law? Can Alpha legally fire her — or worse, force her to "self-resign"?
And the bonus question the user added: What if it had been 5 days instead of 4?
🧐 "First instance": what most employees (and employers) assume
Employee assumption: "My manager approved it verbally — surely that counts." Employer assumption: "She left without written approval — we can do whatever we want, including demand her resignation."
Both assumptions are partially wrong, partially right — and the truth depends entirely on which exact rule applies. Let's run through the mechanism. 🔍
⚖️ "On appeal": what the law actually says, layer by layer
Layer 1: How many leave days did Lily even have?
This is the baseline that most employees overlook. Per Article 113, Labor Code 2019:
- Full 12 months worked = 12 working days of annual leave (standard conditions)
- Working less than 12 months = proportional accrual (number of months worked ÷ 12 × 12 days)
Lily signed in March 2026 and requested leave in April 2026 — roughly 2 months of work. That means she had accrued approximately 2 days of paid annual leave, assuming the company had no more favorable internal policy. She requested 4 days. She was already asking for 2 more days than she'd formally earned.
What about the remaining 2 days? Per Article 115, Labor Code 2019, personal leave with pay only applies to specific life events (own marriage, child's marriage, immediate family death). Everything else can be negotiated as unpaid leave under Article 115.3 — but "negotiated" requires actual agreement, not assumed approval.
Layer 2: Was Lily's verbal + email combination enough to constitute approval?
This depends entirely on Company Alpha's labor rules (nội quy lao động):
- If Alpha's rules specify written/email confirmation as mandatory for all leave requests → Lily's departure without email confirmation = a procedural violation
- If Alpha's rules permit verbal approval from the direct manager → Manager Mike's verbal "yes" in front of the team constitutes valid approval, and Alpha's disciplinary action is itself unlawful
- If Alpha's rules are silent or unclear → this becomes a factual question about what can be proven. Lily's strongest evidence: witnesses to Mike's verbal approval and her own documented email attempts
Key point for Lily: document everything retroactively — names of colleagues who witnessed the verbal approval, screenshots of both emails sent, record of the dates the emails went unanswered.
Layer 3: Can Alpha force Lily to write a resignation letter?
No. Full stop. This is explicitly illegal. Forcing an employee to self-terminate under the guise of "self-discipline" is a coerced unilateral termination by the employer — not a voluntary resignation. It carries no legal standing, and Lily has every right to refuse.
Layer 4: Can Alpha fire (sa thải) Lily for 4 days of absence?
No. For 4 days of absence — even if procedurally improper — the law does not permit dismissal. The maximum available sanction depends on Alpha's internal disciplinary ladder (nội quy), and must follow the full disciplinary procedure under Articles 122–124, Labor Code 2019 — formal meeting, union representation opportunity, written decision. Alpha cannot skip that process either.
⚠️ The Five-Day Cliff: when everything changes
Now here's what the user specifically asked about — and it's the most important number in this entire article. 🚨
Scenario A: 5+ CONSECUTIVE working days absent — Article 36.1(e)
Under Article 36.1(e), Labor Code 2019:
"The employer may unilaterally terminate the labor contract when: ... the employee abandons work without valid reason for 5 or more consecutive working days."
At 5 consecutive working days, the employer's legal position shifts from "can discipline" to "can unilaterally terminate the contract" — without going through a disciplinary process at all. This is a termination right, not a disciplinary sanction. The key distinctions:
- Does not require notice — unlike most other cases of employer unilateral termination, Article 36.2 does not list point (e) among the cases requiring prior notice. The contract can be terminated immediately upon the threshold being crossed.
- "Valid reason" exceptions: natural disaster, fire, illness of the worker or an immediate family member with a certificate from an authorized medical facility, and other cases specified in the company's labor rules. Without one of these, 5 consecutive working days = the threshold is met.
- It is NOT a disciplinary dismissal (sa thải) — it bypasses the disciplinary process entirely. The employer exercises a statutory termination right under Article 36.
In Lily's scenario: 4 working days = Article 36.1(e) does NOT apply. But if she had stayed away for the 5th working day without approval or valid reason, Alpha could have terminated her contract the same day.
Scenario B: The cumulative absence trap — Article 125.4
Article 125.4, Labor Code 2019 provides for disciplinary dismissal (sa thải) when:
- An employee self-abandons work for 5 cumulative days within any 30-day period, OR
- 20 cumulative days within any 365-day period — counting from the first day of abandonment
This is different from Article 36.1(e) because:
- The days don't have to be consecutive — scattered absences across 30 days accumulate
- This IS a disciplinary sanction (sa thải), so the full disciplinary procedure is required: formal hearing, opportunity for the employee and union representative to give their account, written disciplinary decision
- The "valid reason" exceptions are the same: natural disaster, fire, illness confirmed by a medical certificate, or other causes in the labor rules
The practical danger zone many employees miss: three unauthorized days this week, two more next week — 5 cumulative in 30 days — puts you in Article 125.4 territory even though you were never absent for 5 consecutive days.
📊 The legal map at a glance
The spectrum above maps all four zones. The single most important takeaway:
The difference between "I can discipline you" and "I can terminate your contract today" is often exactly one working day. Day 4: trouble. Day 5 consecutive: termination right. The cliff is real, and it is exactly one day high. 📅
🏠🚗 Real-life analogies
- 🚗 Parking violations vs. vehicle impoundment. Parking in a no-parking zone earns you a fine — the car stays yours. But abandon your car in a tow-away zone for long enough, and the city impounds it and you lose it until you pay to reclaim it. Unauthorized absence works the same way: short unauthorized absence = fine/discipline; past the statutory threshold = the employer can take the "vehicle" (your job) entirely.
- 🏠 Overstaying a tenancy vs. abandoning the property. A tenant a few days late returning keys gets a strongly worded notice. A tenant who disappears for weeks — leaving the property functionally abandoned — gives the landlord a completely different set of legal remedies. Vietnamese labor law draws that same line at five consecutive working days.
🤔 Did you know? Quick legal trivia 🤔
- "Working days" ≠ calendar days. Article 36.1(e) counts working days — if the 5-day stretch includes weekends, public holidays, or scheduled days off, those don't count toward the threshold. A 7-calendar-day absence over a long weekend might only be 4 working days, which keeps the employee in the "discipline but not terminate" zone.
- Under Article 122, Labor Code 2019, an employer processing disciplinary dismissal (Article 125) must notify the union and conduct a formal hearing where the employee has the right to defend themselves, bring their union representative, and receive the written decision. Skipping any step makes the disciplinary dismissal unlawful — even if the underlying absence was genuinely unauthorized.
- Forcing an employee to write their own resignation letter as a "self-discipline" measure — exactly what Alpha demanded of Lily — is a well-documented illegal practice in Vietnam. Courts and labor inspectorates consistently treat such "voluntary resignations" obtained under employer pressure as unlawful dismissals in disguise, restoring the employee's rights accordingly.
- The "valid reason" exception in both Article 36.1(e) and Article 125.4 requires a certificate from an authorized medical facility for illness — a self-declaration or a family member's word is not enough. Medical documentation matters.
📝 Quick self-quiz — are you unauthorized-leave-law-fluent?
-
After 2 months of employment at Company Alpha, approximately how many days of paid annual leave has Lily accrued? A. Zero B. 2 days C. 6 days D. 12 days
-
Under Article 36.1(e), from how many consecutive working days of unauthorized absence does the employer gain the right to unilaterally terminate the labor contract? A. 3 B. 4 C. 5 D. 7
-
True or false: Article 125.4 dismissal (sa thải) requires 5 consecutive working days of absence.
-
Which of these is a valid "justified reason" exception under Articles 36.1(e) and 125.4? A. Verbal explanation by the employee B. Medical certificate from an authorized health facility C. WhatsApp message to the manager D. Verbal approval from a coworker
-
Company Alpha demanding that Lily write her own resignation letter as a disciplinary measure is: A. Legally permitted if the labor rules allow it B. Permitted only for serious violations C. Illegal regardless of circumstances D. Permitted during probation only
Answer key: 1-B · 2-C · 3-False (it's cumulative, not necessarily consecutive) · 4-B · 5-C 🎉
💡 Practical tips — for employees AND employers
If you're the employee (like Lily):
- Read your labor rules before you book any flights. Know your company's leave approval process — specifically, whether verbal approval is valid or whether you need written/email confirmation.
- Create a paper trail even when the approval is verbal. A follow-up message to your manager ("Just confirming our conversation — you approved my leave for April 20-23?") turns a verbal "yes" into documented evidence.
- Never write a self-resignation under pressure. Your employer cannot legally demand this. If you're in this situation, consult a labor lawyer or contact your local Department of Labor (Sở Lao động - Thương binh và Xã hội) for guidance.
- Know the five-day cliff. If a dispute is escalating and you're considering staying away from work, the fifth consecutive working day is the legal point of no return under Article 36.1(e). Don't cross it unintentionally.
If you're the employer (like Company Alpha):
- Respond to leave requests promptly and in writing. An employer's silence in the face of a documented email leave request creates evidentiary ambiguity that often cuts against the employer, not the employee. If you deny leave, say so explicitly and in writing.
- Follow the full disciplinary procedure for any sanction. Informal "self-discipline" demands, verbal disciplinary notices, and forced resignation requests are all legally invalid — and expose the company to wrongful termination claims.
- Keep Article 36.1(e) and Article 125.4 clearly distinguished in your labor rules. The five-day consecutive threshold and the cumulative threshold serve different disciplinary functions and require different responses.
🌿 A quick detour into nature's version of this rule
Behavioral ecologists describe "territorial desertion" — when an animal vacates its territory for a period, other animals begin tentatively moving in. Up to a certain point, a brief absence doesn't trigger full takeover: the territory-holder returns and reasserts. But past a threshold — typically the point where competing animals have had time to establish themselves — the returning animal cannot reclaim the space without a full contest. Vietnamese labor law runs on an identical logic: brief unauthorized absence = you're still the employee, you face consequences but keep your job. Past the statutory threshold = the employer can legitimately "fill the territory." The five consecutive working day cliff is, evolutionarily speaking, the point at which the employer's investment in waiting for your return stops making competitive sense. 🦁
🗣️ Over to you
Do you think Vietnam's five-consecutive-working-day threshold under Article 36.1(e) strikes the right balance between employer flexibility and worker protection? And for those who've been in Lily's position — leave approved verbally, emails unanswered, discipline notice on your desk — what did you do? Share your story in the comments. And if you know someone navigating an unauthorized-leave dispute right now, this one's for them. 📣
#VietnamLaw #LaborLaw #UnauthorizedLeave #EmployeeRights #BoluatLaoDong #DeluluVN #NgocPrinny #LegalEducation #HRVietnam #WorkplaceRights #delulu.vn
🚨 Fun but serious: a brief legal disclaimer 🚨
Hey there, legal explorer! 🕵️♀️ Before you close this tab —
- This article is a map, not a teleporter 🗺️ — it guides you through the law, but your specific contract, company rules, and facts determine the outcome.
- The analysis here is based on the Labor Code 2019 and consolidated Decree 145/2020/NĐ-CP — check whether your company's internal rules add additional layers.
- For real-world disputes, summon a professional legal wizard 🧙♀️ — may we suggest Thầy Điệp & Associates Law Firm.
- Reading this doesn't make you a labor lawyer, the same way reading a recipe doesn't make you a chef. 🍳😉
Full disclaimer: ngocprinny.blogspot.com/2024/08/disclaimer.html
#LegalInfo #delulu.vn #NotLegalAdvice #ConsultAPro #NgocPrinny
💝 Support your legal ninja's wellness fund! 🍵
This article cross-referenced the full consolidated Labor Code (18/VBHN-VPQH) and Decree 145/2020 to make sure the day counts and legal tracks are exactly right. That level of care runs on:
- Hours with primary legal sources 📚
- 10+ years of hands-on legal expertise ⚖️
- A genuine wish that no one loses their job over a misunderstanding about process 📝
- And, as always, herbal tea 🍵
If this helped you navigate a tricky leave situation — or helped you set up cleaner HR policies — consider treating this ninja to a green tea →. 🌱
More about the author and the DELULU world: delulu.vn/about-2/
Author: Nguyễn Lê Bảo Ngọc (Ngọc Prinny) Reviewed by: Lawyer Lê Thị Kim Dung and Lawyer Nguyễn Văn Điệp, Thầy Điệp & Associates Law Firm
And a little closing wish, timed exactly to when you're reading this:
🌙 Nếu bạn đọc bài viết này vào buổi tối, chúc bạn ngủ thật ngon — và mong rằng mọi đơn xin nghỉ của bạn đều được duyệt đúng quy trình. ☀️ Nếu bạn đọc vào buổi sáng, chúc bạn một ngày tràn đầy năng lượng — và nhớ lưu lại email xác nhận nghỉ phép nhé! 🇬🇧 Wherever you're reading from — may your leave requests always get a timely reply, and your five-day cliff stay safely un-crossed. 🇯🇵 いつ読んでいても、心穏やかな一日を。 🇫🇷 Et où que vous soyez, que vos congés soient toujours bien approuvés et documentés. ☘️
