New Labour Framework: Voluntary Resignation of the Employee—Legislative Provisions & Administrative Absurdity
(Article 14 of Law No. 5239/2025)

The voluntary resignation of the employee appeared/appears to be something disarmingly simple. The procedure, however, for its notification has historically been one of the most problematic aspects of labour law—certainly also in practice. This specific method of termination of the employment relationship, although seemingly straightforward (i.e. the employee leaves on their own initiative), has created, as we have explained in previous publications, a series of practical and legal impasses. The excessively long period of unjustified absence before it could be deemed a tacit termination of the contract by the employee, the resulting need for co-signature by the parties, and inconsistencies between the law and the implementing Ministerial Decision have, over time, created numerous problems. On the basis of these facts, the legislator’s attempt to comprehensively revisit and rationalise the notification of voluntary resignation appears reasonable. With Article 14 of Law No. 5239/2025, Article 330 of the Labour Code (Presidential Decree No. 62/2025) was fundamentally amended.

From Forms to Digital Declarations

The first—and logically expected—change is the complete abolition of the obligation to submit “forms” in every case of termination or expiry of the employment relationship. Henceforth, the declarations provided for in Ministerial Decision No. 40331/Δ1.13521/13.9.2019 are submitted digitally through the ERGANI II Information System.

This change aligns with the general legislative intent to utilise digital tools in the workplace, largely standardising the process of the relevant notifications. However, it simultaneously transfers the entire burden to the functionality and reliability of the platform, which, unfortunately, is not always guaranteed or self-evident.

Abolition of the Co-Signature Requirement and Notification of Voluntary Resignation by the Employee

The abolition of the requirement for co-signature of the voluntary resignation notification by the undertaking is, evidently, a natural development. With access to the ERGANI II Information System through personalised credentials, the identity of the person submitting the notification is already verified, rendering co-signature unnecessary.

Additionally, the employee is granted the possibility to notify their voluntary resignation themselves, through the ERGANI II Information System (Article 330 §6 of Presidential Decree No. 62/2025). The employer is automatically informed through the system.

In practice, the employee may, using their personal credentials, submit their resignation declaration, while the undertaking receives notification through the system, without the need for any further action. After all, the employee’s resignation does not depend on the employer’s (non-)consent. It is noted that, naturally, the employee’s other obligations continue to apply—at least at a theoretical level (e.g. notice period in an indefinite-term contract, existence of a serious reason in the case of early departure from a fixed-term contract, etc.).

Tacit Resignation

As we have already analysed in previous publications, when the employee: (a) ceases to attend work without notification (or without an express declaration of resignation) or (b) refuses to sign the resignation declaration in the relevant form, their intention to terminate the employment relationship is tacit.

At that point, the issue arises: how is voluntary resignation notified, without the employee having affixed their signature or formally declared such intention?

It is worth noting that the relevant procedure has undergone significant legislative changes in recent years. Until 2023, the employer served an extrajudicial declaration on the employee no later than four (4) working days from their departure from work and notified the resignation on the following working day after service of the extrajudicial declaration. Under Law No. 5053/2023 (Article 23), a total period of ten (10) working days of unjustified absence (!!!) was required before the voluntary resignation of the employee could be notified, subject also to other formal requirements.

The Current (Improved) Regime

It is now provided (§3 of Article 333 of Presidential Decree No. 62/2025) that, in the event the employee is unjustifiably absent from work for more than three (3) consecutive working days, the employer has the right to call upon them to resume work. If, following the employer’s notice, the employee continues to be unjustifiably absent for an additional two (2) working days, the employer notifies the voluntary resignation, without the employee’s signature being required. An additional period of two (2) working days is provided for the submission of the notification.

It is clarified that the term “working days” refers to working days of the public sector and not of the undertaking in which the employee is employed.

The employer’s notice is declared by way of a solemn declaration in the ERGANI II Information System. The notice itself is not uploaded, thereby eliminating the inconsistency between the law and the Ministerial Decision. The notice may be proven by any appropriate means. The employee is informed thereof via notification sent through the “MyErgani” application.

It is observed that the new regulatory framework significantly improves the previously highly problematic legislative provision. The period of unjustified absence of the employee, after which it may be deemed that a tacit termination of the employment contract has occurred on their part, is substantially reduced. This adjustment aligns with existing case law, according to which even five (5) days of unjustified absence may be considered as tacit termination of the employment relationship.

Furthermore, it becomes easier to notify the employee, as service of an extrajudicial document through a bailiff is no longer required. This change, already introduced by Law No. 5053/2023, is, fortunately, maintained by the recent Law No. 5239/2025. Any form of notice to the employee now suffices, provided, of course, that it can be proven.

At the same time, the previously restrictive time limits for notifying voluntary resignation are extended. The declaration may now be made up to two (2) working days after the lapse, without action, of the (overall) five-day period of unjustified absence of the employee.

Towards a More Functional Procedure…

The new law seeks to resolve long-standing dysfunctions and legislative shortcomings, several of which we have analysed in previous publications. The new regulation undoubtedly moves in the right direction.

It must, however, be noted that the effective and substantive implementation of the legislative intent ultimately depends on corresponding technological progress and technical support.

…and the Currently Inapplicable Framework

Nevertheless, the precise procedure to be followed for the notification of voluntary resignation unfortunately remains in doubt. Although the relevant legislative framework has already been amended since 2023, the upgrading procedures of the ERGANI Information System have not yet been completed to date. The result: the statutory provisions remain essentially inapplicable. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the Labour Inspectorate considers the pre-existing (pre-2023 (!!!) and aligned with the ERGANI Information System) legislative framework to be applicable. At the same time, judicial decisions (as is self-evident) adopt the application of the provisions of the current substantive law, irrespective of the fact that the legislative provisions cannot be complied with, as they are not aligned with the current form of the ERGANI Information System.

For perhaps the first time, a functional system for declaring voluntary resignation is established. This, however, is of no value without the long-awaited completion and operational implementation of the ERGANI II Information System. It appears paradoxical that the Labour Inspectorate proposes the application of the pre-existing (indeed pre-2023!!!) legislative framework. Activation of the administration of the competent ministry as well as of the Independent Authority is undoubtedly required. It is regrettable that, legislatively, we move forward—as we should—while, in practice, we remain behind, operating as “public servants” in the negative sense.

Stavros Koumentakis

Managing Partner

Koumentakis and Associates Law Firm