“You’re being fired by article” — in Russia, that phrase lands like a verdict: a mark in your employment record book, trouble finding your next job. In practice, almost everyone is technically fired “by article” — it simply means the contract was terminated on the employer’s initiative rather than by the employee’s own choice. The real question isn’t whether there’s an article behind it, but whether the employer applied it lawfully. Here are the grounds employers use most often, and what to check before deciding whether to challenge the dismissal.
What “Fired by Article” Actually Means
Every dismissal cites a specific article and clause of the Labor Code — even resigning of your own accord runs through Clause 3, Part 1, Article 77 of the Russian Labor Code (with the actual procedure spelled out in Article 80). But colloquially, “fired by article” specifically means dismissal on the employer’s initiative for the employee’s own fault — one of the grounds under Article 81 of the Labor Code.
That’s fundamentally different from a layoff or a mutual-agreement termination: here the employer is accusing the employee of a specific violation, and the entry in the employment record book can genuinely give a future employer pause. That’s exactly why these dismissals end up in court more often than any other kind.
The Grounds Employers Use Most Often
| Article 81 Clause | Ground | What the Employer Must Prove |
|---|---|---|
| Clause 5 | Repeated failure to perform duties | An unexpunged prior sanction, plus a new violation that occurred after it |
| Clause 6, item “a” | Unauthorized absence (“progul”) | Absence without valid reason for a full day, or 4+ consecutive hours |
| Clause 6, items “b”–“d” | Intoxication, disclosure of protected secrets, theft, safety violations | For theft — only a final court verdict or a ruling from the authority handling administrative offenses |
| Clause 7 | Loss of trust | A specific proven act of misconduct (shortage, fraud) — applies only to employees who directly handle money or goods |
| Clause 11 | Falsified documents at hiring | Proof the document was forged and influenced the hiring decision |
Unauthorized absence (item “a” of Clause 6) is the most common case in practice — we have a separate article on the site with a detailed breakdown of that specific procedure.
Article 81 has other grounds too — for example, a single gross violation of duties by the head of the organization (Clause 10) — but the ones above are the most common in disputes that actually reach court.
Two Conditions Without Which Any “Firing by Article” Is Unlawful
Formally citing a clause of the law isn’t enough. The employer must satisfy both of the following at once:
- Prove the violation actually happened — not just assert it. Under Clause 5, the employer must show the prior sanction hasn’t been lifted or expunged, and that the new violation occurred after the employee was notified of it. Under Clause 7, the employer must prove a specific instance of a shortage or fraud — not just general suspicion.
- Follow the disciplinary procedure under Article 193 of the Labor Code:
- request a written explanation from the employee;
- wait 2 business days — if none is given, draw up a formal record of that (this doesn’t block the dismissal, but the record is mandatory);
- apply the sanction within one month of discovering the violation (not counting sick leave, vacation time, or time spent consulting the union);
- stay within the outer limit — 6 months from the date of the violation (up to 2 years for violations uncovered by a financial audit or review; up to 3 years for corruption-related violations, though that’s a separate and rarer case);
- only one sanction per violation.
A separate, stricter rule: under Part 6, Article 81, an employer cannot dismiss an employee on its own initiative at all while that employee is on sick leave or on vacation (the sole exception being liquidation of the organization). If the employer issued a dismissal order during that period, the dismissal is unlawful on that basis alone — regardless of whether the underlying violation actually occurred.
Missing any of these deadlines, or skipping the written explanation, is on its own grounds for reinstatement — even if the violation itself was real.
How Courts Check Whether the Penalty Fits the Violation
Even where the violation is proven and the procedure was followed, courts separately examine whether the dismissal was proportionate to the severity of the violation. The employer has to show it considered:
- the severity of the violation and the circumstances surrounding it;
- the employee’s prior conduct and work record;
- how long the employee had worked at the organization;
- whether a lighter sanction — a warning or a reprimand — would have been appropriate instead of dismissal.
Courts regularly reinstate employees on exactly this basis. A telling example from the Russian Supreme Court Presidium’s Review of Case Law of December 9, 2020: a teacher with more than 30 years of service and no prior sanctions was fired over a 90-minute absence from her workplace. The court reinstated her, ruling that the penalty was disproportionate and failed to account for her long record of conscientious work.
Common Employer Mistakes
- Stacking sanctions back to back — a reprimand and a dismissal issued days apart, giving the employee no real chance to correct course. Courts treat this as an abuse of the employer’s rights.
- Vague dismissal orders — the order doesn’t state the exact date, time, and nature of the violation. Without that, neither the employee nor a court can properly assess whether the dismissal was lawful.
- Skipping the written explanation — firing “on the spot” without giving the employee the two business days the law requires.
- Dismissing during sick leave or vacation — directly prohibited by Part 6, Article 81 (aside from liquidation of the organization). One of the most blatant and easiest-to-prove mistakes: a sick note or a vacation order dated to the day of dismissal settles it.
- Citing “loss of trust” without facts — just writing the phrase into the order without backing it with a specific, proven incident.
What to Do If You Were Fired “By Article”
- Get the dismissal order and your employment record book — the employer must hand these over on your last working day. Read the stated grounds carefully.
- Check the deadline — you have 1 month from the day you received the dismissal order or the employment record book to file a reinstatement claim in court (Article 392 of the Labor Code). That deadline runs from that specific moment, not from your last working day or the date you actually stopped working — a distinction that trips people up often enough to cost them the claim. Missing it without a valid reason can bar the lawsuit.
- Gather evidence — correspondence, witnesses, documents about your qualifications and track record, copies of any prior sanctions.
- Check the procedure — were you asked for a written explanation, were the deadlines respected, does the penalty fit the violation.
When You Need a Lawyer
- You were dismissed without a written explanation, or without being given the two business days to provide one.
- The dismissal was dated to your sick leave or vacation — a standalone, easily proven ground for reversal under Part 6, Article 81.
- The wording in the order is vague — it’s unclear exactly what you were fired for.
- You had a prior sanction, but it had already expired (a year had passed) or had already been used in an earlier dismissal.
- The penalty is clearly disproportionate — dismissal over a minor issue despite a long, clean record.
- The employer cites “loss of trust” or disclosure of a secret without any proven, specific facts.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I challenge a dismissal “by article” if the violation actually happened? Yes, if the employer broke the procedure — didn’t request an explanation, missed the Article 193 deadlines, or applied a penalty disproportionate to the violation. The fact that a violation occurred doesn’t by itself mean the dismissal was carried out lawfully.
How much time do I have to go to court after being fired “by article”? One month from the day you received the dismissal order or your employment record book — set by Article 392 of the Labor Code. The deadline can be reinstated for a valid reason, but that’s not something to count on.
What happens if a court finds the dismissal unlawful? The employee is reinstated, awarded average earnings for the period of forced absence, and, if claimed, compensation for moral damages. The employee can also request a change in the stated grounds for dismissal instead of reinstatement, if they’d rather not return.
Can an employer fire someone immediately, with no prior warnings or sanctions? Under Clause 5, Part 1, Article 81 — no, an active prior sanction for an earlier violation is required. But under Clause 6 (a single gross violation, such as unauthorized absence), one incident is enough — no prior warning is needed.
Does being fired “by article” hurt future job prospects? Technically, the entry in the employment record book is visible to a future employer, but the law doesn’t allow that employer to demand the reason for a previous dismissal as a condition of hiring. In practice, a lot depends on the industry and the exact wording — in disputed cases, it’s worth considering whether to have the wording changed through the courts.
Read Also
- Firing an Employee in Russia: Legal Options — the employer’s-side view: which ground to pick and how to avoid a court-ordered reinstatement
- Wrongful Dismissal in Russia: How to Challenge It — the general playbook for any grounds: deadlines, where to file, and what you can recover
- Dismissal for Absenteeism in Russia: Procedure and Documents — a detailed look at the most common ground under Clause 6, Part 1, Article 81
- 6 Signs Your Employer Is Preparing to Fire You — how to spot it coming and prepare in time
Fired “by article” and not sure it was lawful? We’ll review the order, the grounds, and the procedure, and assess your chances of reinstatement or having the wording changed. Reach out — we’ll look into your situation.