Destroyed Enterprise Due to War: When Employee Dismissal Is Possible
An employer may terminate an employment contract with an employee if it is impossible to provide work due to the destruction or absence of production, organizational, or technical conditions as a result of hostilities. However, certain legal conditions must be met for such dismissal to be lawful.
As noted by the State Labor Service of Ukraine, according to paragraph 6 of part one of article 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, an employment contract may be terminated at the employer’s initiative if it is impossible to provide the employee with the work specified in the contract due to the destruction or absence of production, organizational, and technical conditions, means of production, or employer’s property as a result of hostilities.
For the lawful application of this provision, the employer must comply with several mandatory conditions. In particular, the fact of destruction of production capacities, means of production, or employer’s property as a result of hostilities must be documented.
Additionally, the employer must offer the employee all available vacancies. Dismissal is possible only if there is no suitable work or if the employee refuses a transfer in writing.
Moreover, the fact of property destruction must be confirmed by documentation. This may include acts, certificates from the State Emergency Service of Ukraine, as well as inventory materials.
An employee dismissed on this basis is entitled to severance pay of at least the average monthly salary. This is stipulated by article 44 of the Labor Code of Ukraine.
As previously reported by the "Judicial and Legal Newspaper", dismissal under paragraph 9 part 1 article 36 of the Labor Code of Ukraine is lawful only if the dismissal order specifies a particular provision of another law establishing an independent ground for termination of the employment contract. A legal provision that only defines the competence of a legal entity’s body regarding appointment and dismissal of employees is not an independent ground for dismissal. This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court in the composition of the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Civil Court.
On June 3, 2026, the Cassation Civil Court of the Supreme Court considered in simplified proceedings the cassation appeal of an individual in a case against JSC "Ukrposhta", the Supervisory Board of JSC "Ukrposhta" regarding recognition of unlawful and cancellation of orders, reinstatement at work, and recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence.
To substantiate the claims, the plaintiff stated that she worked as the director of the internal audit department of JSC "Ukrposhta".
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, our page on Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.
