Severance pay

Unlike contributions or income tax, the Romanian Labour Code’s dismissal chapter contains no months-per-years-of-service table, no multiplier, no cap and no floor for a severance payment. That is not a gap in this page — it is what the law actually says: article 67 states no amount and instead points elsewhere. That does not mean a dismissed employee never receives anything; it means the amount, if any, does not come from the Labour Code — it comes from the applicable collective labour agreement, the individual employment contract, or a redundancy plan the employer adopts.

What article 67 says

Article 67 of the Labour Code (Codul muncii), in its consolidated form, reads — in Romanian, its own language, quoted verbatim rather than translated and presented as the text itself:

“Salariații concediați pentru motive care nu țin de persoana lor beneficiază de măsuri active de combatere a șomajului și pot beneficia de compensații în condițiile prevăzute de lege și de contractul colectiv de muncă aplicabil.”

Two phrases carry the whole finding, glossed here rather than translated as the quote itself:

• “Pot beneficia”(“may benefit”) — not “benefit”. The text creates no automatic right to a sum; it only opens a possibility, conditioned on other instruments.
• “În condițiile prevăzute de lege și de contractul colectiv de muncă aplicabil” (“under the conditions set by law and by the applicable collective labour agreement”) — the actual source of any amount is another statute or the collective agreement, never article 67 itself.

When article 67 applies

Article 67’s pointer is triggered only for dismissal for reasons unrelated to the employee’s person (article 65) — the effective abolition of the post, for a real and serious cause:

“Concedierea pentru motive care nu țin de persoana salariatului reprezintă încetarea contractului individual de muncă determinată de desființarea locului de muncă ocupat de salariat, din unul sau mai multe motive fără legătură cu persoana acestuia. Desființarea locului de muncă trebuie să fie efectivă și să aibă o cauză reală și serioasă.”

What the law does fix — notice

Article 75 of the Labour Code fixes, independently of article 67, a notice period that cannot be shorter than 20 days working, for dismissals for reasons unrelated to the employee’s person. It is a legal minimum — an individual or collective contract may set a longer notice period, never a shorter one. Notice is a separate obligation from any compensation article 67 might point to; they sit in different sections of the Code, sized by different sources.

A different scope — collective dismissal

When an employer dismisses several employees at once for reasons unrelated to their person, within a 30 days calendar window, article 68 sets thresholds that decide whether the collective-dismissal information-and-consultation procedure (articles 69–70) applies — NOT an amount and NOT an extra entitlement to compensation. Crossing a threshold changes the procedure the employer must follow, not what any individual employee receives:

The statute says “more than 20” employees for the first band — this page renders that condition as “21 or more”, the correct integer reading of “strictly more than 20” for a whole number of employees.

Where an actual entitlement would come from

Because the law fixes no amount, the only place a precise answer can exist for a given employee is: the collective labour agreement applicable at the employer or sector level, the individual employment contract, or a redundancy plan the employer adopts for the dismissal in question. This page names and quotes no specific collective agreement — none is among its verified sources. For a real amount, the document to consult is whichever one actually applies to the workplace in question.

The full content for this page is still being written.