Eurofound's ERM database on restructuring-related legal regulations provides
information on regulations in the Member States of the European Union and Norway
which are explicitly or implicitly linked to anticipating and managing change.
Finland: Definition of collective dismissal
Phase
Co-operation Act (1333/2021), Act on Cooperation within Finnish and Community-wide Groups of Undertakings (335/2007), Act on Cooperation within Government Agencies and Institutions (1233/2013), Act on Cooperation […] within Municipalities (449/2007)
Native name
Yhteistoimintalaki (1333/2021), Laki yhteistoiminnasta suomalaisissa ja yhteisönlaajuisissa yritysryhmissä (335/2007), Laki yhteistoiminnasta valtion virastoissa ja laitoksissa (1233/2013), Laki työnantajan ja henkilöstön välisestä yhteistoiminnasta kunnissa (449/2007)
There is no official definition of 'collective dismissal'. The four acts referred to here define the terms of dismissal and other cooperation procedures in different types of organisations. The employer is obliged to negotiate with the employees whenever the employer considers measures which may lead to notice of terminations or lay-offs and affect one or several employees.
The employer must give notice before the start of the cooperation negotiations so as to allow the employee representatives to properly prepare for the negotiations. The negotiations are generally carried out between the employer and employee representatives, but also the concerned employee(s) may participate. The employer must provide the employee representatives with:
information regarding the grounds of the intended measures;
initial estimates of numbers of employees affected;
principles determining which employees will be affected; and
a time estimate of the implementation of the measures.
The employer must also notify the public employment services (PES) of the intended measures, and in cooperation with the PES investigate available public services to support employment. At the end of the cooperation negotiations, the employer must present a report on its intended actions to the employee representatives.
There is no strictly defined minimum for company size or number of employees affected for a collective dismissal. Previously, companies employing at least 20 employees had to follow a cooperation procedure for a dismissal to be valid, while smaller companies were not bound by this obligation. The minimum negotiation period varied with company size and the number of affected employees.
From 1 July 2025, legislative amendments to the Finnish Cooperation Act (Yhteistoimintalaki, 1333/2021), raised the threshold from 20 to 50 employees for full application of the Act, while companies with 20–49 employees must comply with certain obligations. Minimum negotiation periods are now 7 days or 3 weeks, depending on the matters to be negotiated and company size.
Commentary
The amendments coming into effect from 1 July 2025 aim to reduce administrative burdens and improve all companies’ ability to respond to changes in their operating environment, with future changes potentially addressing board-level employee representation.
Additional metadata
Cost covered by
None
Involved actors other than national government
National government
Involvement (others)
None
Thresholds
Affected employees: No, applicable in all circumstances Company size: No, applicable in all circumstances Additional information: No, applicable in all circumstances
Sources
Watson Wyatt (2006) Employment Terms &Conditions Report Europe Volume I, Brussels, Belgium
This Eurofound research paper explores key trends in restructuring in recent years, highlighting the companies that announced the largest job losses and job gains in the EU. It builds on an analysis of company announcements recorded in Eurofound’s European Restructuring Monitor (ERM), alongside a new classification of restructuring events involving changes in company location.
Employers increasingly use tools such as email, SMS and messaging apps like WhatsApp or Signal to communicate with employees. While these technologies offer both efficiency and convenience, their use in communicating sensitive information, particularly for notifying employees of dismissal, raises legal concerns. This article explores the legal framework on dismissals across the EU, with a special focus on the use of digital means for communicating employment dismissals. Drawing on examples from various Member States, it examines the legal validity of digital dismissals.
In 2023, thousands of workers in big tech lost their jobs. Meta, Amazon, Google, Apple, Microsoft and Salesforce had been considered to offer good and secure jobs up to this point. Giants of the information and communication technology (ICT) sector, these companies are among the highest paying, with Eurostat data from 2022 indicating that workers in ICT had the second-highest median gross hourly earnings (surpassed only by earnings in the financial sector).[1] These layoffs were a shock, especially as the biggest companies had hired extensively during the COVID-19 pandemic. What happened in the two years after this redundancy wave – was that the end of the cuts or did the companies start expanding again?
In 2024, the automotive sector in the EU came to the fore in public and policy discussions. The focus was on the slowdown in electric vehicle (EV) sales, rising global competition, belated investments in new technologies, and the potential closure of production lines in Europe. A number of European car manufacturers and suppliers announced their intention to make large-scale redundancies and change long-standing collective agreements on job security and wages, while workers raised concerns amid demonstrations and industrial action.