Can the worker leave his job?

[Joywtseo421]

Article 50.1 of the Workers' Statute sets out the reasons for which the worker may request termination, including section b) "Non-payment or continued delays in payment of the agreed salary."

Section two of article 50 of the Workers' Statute recognises the right of the worker to obtain compensation comparable to that for unfair dismissal.

Therefore, the employee may terminate the employment relationship in the event of non-payment of wages or continued delays.

A classic question is to determine whether the resolution action taiwan business mailing list of article 50 of the Workers' Statute is judicial or extrajudicial .

If the action is judicial, the worker must remain in the company until a judgment is issued. If it is extrajudicial, the worker can break the employment relationship while awaiting a favorable judgment.

Traditional criterion
Until the Supreme Court ruling of 20 July 2012, the employee was required to remain in the company until a ruling was issued.

The continuity of the employment relationship is required , except in certain cases in which the employment relationship may be suspended as a precautionary measure. The provision of services may be suspended and terminated when an attack on the dignity, physical or moral integrity or fundamental rights of the worker is observed.


However, classical jurisprudence understood that non-payment of wages or delays do not fit into this type of exception. The worker may not leave his job until the termination of the contract is declared by court order.

The Supreme Court doctrine required that the employment contract must be in force at the time the action to terminate the employment relationship was exercised and resolved.

New criterion
The jurisprudence has become more flexible, following the Supreme Court ruling of 20 July 2012 , and its interpretation has changed.

The worker is exempt from continuing to provide services during the termination process. The worker assumes the risk in the event that the judicial body does not consider that there is sufficient gravity to give rise to the termination of the employment relationship under article 50.1.b) of the Workers' Statute.