An employee isn’t pulling their weight, keeps breaking discipline, or just doesn’t fit the team — and the manager keeps putting off the dismissal, afraid of a lawsuit and a court-ordered reinstatement. That fear is well-founded: a large share of employer-initiated dismissals get overturned specifically because of procedural mistakes, not because there was no valid ground to begin with. Here are the grounds employers in Russia actually have for firing someone — from the safest options to the ones that require airtight documentation.
Mutual Agreement — The Safest Option
Under Article 78 of the Labor Code, an employment contract can be terminated by mutual agreement at any time — with no need to justify the reason at all. This is the lowest-risk way to part ways with an employee: no need to prove fault, observe notice periods, or convene a commission.
In practice, the employer offers the employee a payout in exchange for signing — the amount isn’t set by law and is simply whatever the two sides agree to.
The main advantage for the employer: once signed, the agreement can’t be cancelled unilaterally — neither side can back out without the other’s consent (this is explicitly clarified in Paragraph 20 of Russian Supreme Court Plenum Resolution No. 2 of March 17, 2004). That significantly lowers the risk of the employee later challenging the dismissal by claiming coercion — provided, of course, the agreement was signed voluntarily and without real pressure. Don’t rush the signing: give the employee time to actually read the agreement, and don’t push for a signature “right here, right now” under threat of other consequences — that’s the first thing a court checks if the employee does end up challenging it.
The one real exception is pregnancy. If it turns out the employee was pregnant at the time she signed the agreement (even if neither she nor the employer knew it at the time), a court will reinstate her — regardless of the absence of any sign of coercion and the fact that the agreement was signed voluntarily (Russian Supreme Court Plenum Resolution No. 1 of January 28, 2014). The employer having done nothing wrong doesn’t change the outcome.
Probation — If the Employee Hasn’t Passed Yet
If an employee isn’t performing during their first months and is still under a probationary period, dismissal under Article 71 is the fastest legal option.
What has to be done right:
- give the employee written notice no later than 3 calendar days before dismissal (Article 71 doesn’t specify the type of days — so the general rule under Article 14 applies, calendar days, not business days as is sometimes mistakenly assumed);
- state specific reasons in the notice for why they failed probation — not vague language like “didn’t work out,” but a description of actual facts (missed tasks, violations, concrete mistakes);
- no severance pay is owed in this case.
The employee has the right to challenge the dismissal in court — and if the stated reasons are vague or undocumented, the court will likely reinstate them. To make the dismissal hold up, it’s best to set clear tasks and evaluation criteria right at the start of the probationary period (a probation work plan), and document any shortfalls along the way with written records or memos — an unsupported “didn’t work out” doesn’t hold up in court.
Probation periods under Article 70: up to 3 months as a general rule; up to 6 months for company directors, their deputies, chief accountants, and heads of branches; no more than 2 weeks for contracts running 2 to 6 months.
Probation cannot be imposed on: pregnant employees, employees with children under 3, or other people raising such a child without the mother (the age threshold was raised from 1.5 to 3 years by Federal Law No. 91-FZ of April 9, 2026 — a very recent change, in effect only since September 1, 2026), people under 18, recent graduates starting their first job in their field within a year of getting their degree, people elected to their position through a competitive process or an elected office, and people transferred from another employer by agreement between the two employers. If probation is imposed on any of these people anyway, the condition is void, and they cannot be dismissed under Article 71.
Misconduct — Once the Employee Is Past Probation
If probation is over (or was never set) and the employee is breaking discipline, Article 81 applies: repeated failure to perform duties, unauthorized absence, disclosure of protected secrets, theft, loss of trust, falsified hiring documents, and other grounds.
This is trickier than it looks: the law requires not just the violation itself but strict compliance with procedure — a written explanation, respecting the deadlines for applying a sanction, and making sure the penalty fits the severity of the violation. We’ve covered all of these grounds, the evidence required, and the mistakes employers commonly make in a separate, detailed article.
Redundancy — If the Position Itself Isn’t Needed
If the problem isn’t the person but the fact that a position or staff line is genuinely redundant, that’s grounds for a layoff under Clause 2, Part 1, Article 81. This, too, comes with a strict procedure: 2 months’ notice, offering vacancies, and priority retention rights if more than one identical position is being cut. The full procedure is in a separate article on staff redundancy.
Important: if the redundancy is staged on paper while the position itself is kept (just renamed) or a new person is hired into it right after the dismissal, a court will very likely find the redundancy fictitious and reinstate the employee.
What Not to Do
- Dismiss a pregnant employee on the employer’s initiative — this is prohibited outright, except where the organization is being liquidated, no matter how serious the violation (unauthorized absence, theft, or anything else) and regardless of which ground above you intended to use.
- Pressure an employee into writing a resignation “by their own choice.” If the employee proves in court that the resignation was written under pressure or threats, the dismissal is ruled unlawful, and the employer owes average earnings for the period of forced absence plus compensation for moral damages.
- Stage a fictitious redundancy instead of an actual dismissal for misconduct — if the position is kept, this is easy to expose.
- Dismiss “on the word” for repeated violations without paperwork — without written explanations, incident records, and sanction orders, any Article 81 ground falls apart in court.
- Dismiss during sick leave or vacation — directly prohibited by Part 6, Article 81 (aside from liquidation of the organization), no matter how solid the underlying ground is.
How to Choose the Right Ground
- If things are generally fine with the employee, it just didn’t work out — offer a mutual agreement. It’s faster and safer for both sides.
- If the employee is still on probation and genuinely isn’t performing — dismiss under Article 71, with clearly documented reasons.
- If there’s a pattern of disciplinary violations, or a single serious one — gather evidence and proceed under Article 81, following the procedure strictly.
- If the position itself is genuinely redundant — carry out a proper redundancy, not as cover for dismissing a specific person.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an employee be dismissed without giving a reason? Only through a mutual agreement (Article 78) — that’s the one case where no reason is actually required. Every other employer-initiated ground needs documented justification, or the dismissal can be challenged.
Which is safer for an employer — a mutual agreement or dismissal for misconduct? A mutual agreement is almost always safer, if the employee is willing to sign it. Dismissal for misconduct demands flawless documentation and carries a real risk of a court dispute, even when the violation genuinely happened.
Is compensation owed when dismissing someone during probation? No, severance pay under Article 71 isn’t owed. The employee is only entitled to pay for time actually worked and compensation for unused vacation.
Can an employee be dismissed if they simply performed poorly but no violations were ever formally recorded? Without documented violations (records, written explanations, sanction orders), a lawful dismissal for misconduct isn’t realistic. In that situation, a mutual agreement is the more realistic path.
Read Also
- Fired “By Article” in Russia: Grounds and Appeal — a detailed breakdown of the Article 81 grounds and what the procedure requires
- Layoff in Russia: Employee Rights and Procedure — the full redundancy procedure: notices, priority retention rights, severance pay
Need to dismiss an employee but aren’t sure the ground and procedure will hold up in court? We’ll review the documents, help you pick the lowest-risk option, and set up the process so the dismissal can’t be successfully challenged. Reach out — we’ll look into your situation.