Fired without cause in Peru? Arbitrary dismissal, what you are owed, and the 30-day deadline

The deadline: thirty calendar days

This is the fact that decides most cases, and almost nobody learns it in time.

«El plazo para accionar judicialmente en los casos de nulidad de despido, despido arbitrario y hostilidad caduca a los treinta días naturales de producido el hecho.»

Article 36 of the LPCL. Four things to read carefully:

• Calendar days (días naturales), not working days. Weekends and public holidays count.
• It runs from the moment it happened, not from the day you find a lawyer.
• It covers nullity, arbitrary dismissal and hostility alike.
• It cannot be interrupted: «Estos plazos no se encuentran sujetos a interrupción o pacto que los enerve; una vez transcurridos impiden el ejercicio del derecho». The only exception in the article is being physically unable to sue because you are outside Peru and barred from entering, or because the Judiciary is not functioning.

What an arbitrary dismissal is

Article 22 sets the general rule: «Para el despido de un trabajador sujeto a régimen de la actividad privada, que labore cuatro o más horas diarias para un mismo empleador, es indispensable la existencia de causa justa contemplada en la ley y debidamente comprobada». The same article puts the burden of proving the cause on the employer, «dentro del proceso Judicial que el trabajador pudiera interponer para impugnar su despido». Article 37 repeats it: «Ni el despido ni el motivo alegado se deducen o presumen, quien los acusa debe probarlos».

Article 34 then defines arbitrary dismissal, and there are only two triggers:

1. No cause was stated.
2. The cause could not be proven in court.

Just causes are those in article 23 (capacity) and article 24 (conduct: falta grave, criminal conviction for an intentional offence, disqualification). Falta grave is «la infracción por el trabajador de los deberes esenciales que emanan del contrato, de tal índole, que haga irrazonable la subsistencia de la relación», and article 25 spells it out as a closed list with its own thresholds. Literal h), for example, requires «abandono de trabajo por mas de tres días consecutivos» or unjustified absences «por mas de cinco días en un período de treinta días calendario o mas de quince días en un período de ciento ochenta días calendario», and for repeated lateness it requires «que se hayan aplicado sanciones disciplinarias previas de amonestaciones escritas y suspensiones». Missing one day is not falta grave.

What the employer must do first

Article 31 gives the employer two exits, both inside the same sentence: a flagrant falta grave «en que no resulte razonable tal posibilidad», and the thirty-day window where the ground is capacity. Otherwise, dismissing you without the prior chance to answer breaches article 31.

Not every procedural slip wins the case. Article 39 says «la inobservancia de las formalidades no esenciales del despido, no inhibe al juez de pronunciarse sobre el fondo del asunto». What is essential is the cause and your right to defend yourself.

What you are owed

«La indemnización por despido arbitrario es equivalente a una remuneración y media ordinaria mensual por cada año completo de servicios con un máximo de doce (12) remuneraciones.»

Article 38. What the article says, and nothing more:

• 1.5 ordinary monthly salaries for each complete year of service.
• A hard cap of twelve salaries. At 1.5 per year the cap is reached at eight complete years; beyond that the figure stops growing.
• Part-years are paid «por dozavos y treintavos, segun corresponda» — in twelfths and thirtieths.
• «Su abono procede superado el periodo de prueba». Article 10 sets that period: «El período de prueba es de tres meses, a cuyo término el trabajador alcanza derecho a la protección contra el despido arbitrario».

We publish no worked calculation here. The definition of the «remuneración ordinaria mensual» the formula runs on is not in article 38 — it lives in the Regulation (D.S. 001-96-TR), which we could not open on an official source. Take your payslips to a lawyer and have the figure done properly.

That indemnity is the «unica reparación por el daño sufrido» for the dismissal, not for everything else. The same article 34 adds: «Podrá demandar simultaneamente el pago de cualquier otro derecho o beneficio social pendiente». Wages, CTS, bonuses and holiday pay are separate, and article 36 keeps them alive even after the thirty days run out.

The same article 38 indemnity applies if you end the contract yourself in the face of the hostility acts listed in article 30 (article 35, literal b). Before going to court over hostility, article 30 requires you to put the complaint to the employer in writing and give «un plazo razonable no menor de seis días naturales».

Null dismissal is a different thing

Despido nulo is not a worse kind of arbitrary dismissal. It is a separate figure, with a closed list of motives and a different remedy. Article 29 lists them: union membership or union activity; being or having been a workers’ candidate or representative; having complained about or sued the employer; «La discriminación por razón de sexo, raza, religión, opinión, idioma, discapacidad o de cualquier otra índole»; and pregnancy, birth and its consequences or breastfeeding, in the wording given by Ley 31152 (2021).

That literal e) expressly reaches workers inside the probation period and those working four hours a day or fewer.

A further ground was added in 2025. Ley 32431, published on 4 September 2025, makes a null dismissal of one motivated by «El diagnóstico de cáncer, su tratamiento y los efectos derivados, incluso, si el trabajador presta servicios por menos de cuatro horas diarias, se encuentra en período de prueba o tiene la condición de confianza». The Act inserts it as literal f) of article 65 of D. Leg. 728, under the same chapeau «Es nulo el despido que tenga por motivo:». D.S. 008-2026-TR (5 June 2026) regulates the ground by inserting an article 48-A into the Regulation, and also calls it «el literal f) del artículo 65 de la Ley». Neither norm numbers it inside article 29 of the consolidated LPCL (TUO), and we found no consolidated text that does. Our reading is that it corresponds to article 29 of the TUO (D.S. 003-97-TR): Ley 32431 uses the original numbering of D. Leg. 728, the Ley de Fomento del Empleo, and the chapeau it reproduces is the same as article 29’s, so in the TUO it would be a literal f) following e). This is our reading, not an official text.

If a nullity claim succeeds, article 34 says «el trabajador será repuesto en su empleo», unless at enforcement stage the worker prefers the indemnity; and article 40 additionally orders payment of the wages lost since the dismissal, with the corresponding CTS deposits and interest.

Reinstatement is case law, not statute

The LPCL grants reinstatement only for a null dismissal. For a dismissal with no cause at all, reinstatement comes from Constitutional Court doctrine, and that is how it has to be described.

The Court defined despido incausado in Llanos Huasco (Exp. 976-2001-AA/TC, 13 March 2003): «Se produce el denominado despido incausado, cuando: Se despide al trabajador, ya sea de manera verbal o mediante comunicación escrita, sin expresarle causa alguna derivada de la conducta o la labor que la justifique». In Baylón Flores (Exp. 0206-2005-PA/TC, 28 November 2005), whose legal grounds 7 to 25 are binding precedent, the Court held that «el contenido del derecho constitucional a una protección adecuada contra el despido arbitrario supone la indemnización o la reposición según corresponda, a elección del trabajador».

Two honest warnings:

• As of 13 September 2026 we found no later Constitutional Court precedent changing that doctrine for private-sector workers. That was a limited search, not an exhaustive review.
• The deadline for a reinstatement claim after a dismissal with no cause is not settled by article 36, and we found no official source fixing it. A different period is discussed; we do not publish it because we could not verify it. Assume the thirty calendar days of article 36 and see a lawyer on day one, not day twenty-nine.

Sunafil records; only a judge decides

This is the most expensive misunderstanding people have after being dismissed. Sunafil does not give you your job back and does not pay you.

What it does do, under the «Directiva sobre la Verificación de Despido Arbitrario por impedimento de ingreso al Centro de Trabajo», whose version 2 was approved by R.S. 074-2023-SUNAFIL, published on 10 February 2023, which left R.S. 203-2020-SUNAFIL without effect: «la Autoridad Administrativa de Trabajo, a solicitud de parte, prestará su participación para verificar el despido arbitrario que se configure por la negativa del empleador de permitir el ingreso del trabajador al centro de labores, lo que se hará constar en el acta correspondiente».

So: it attends because you asked, it confirms you were refused entry, and it puts that in an acta. The acta is strong evidence for your case. It is not an order.

What only a judge can do: declare the dismissal arbitrary, order payment of the article 38 indemnity, and order reinstatement. The LPCL assigns the outcome to the courts in four separate articles — «proceso Judicial» (art. 22), «en juicio» (art. 34), «accionar judicialmente» (art. 36), «el juez ordenará» (art. 40).

Which court you go to

Ley 29497, in the wording given by Ley 32155 (7 November 2024):

• Up to seventy URP: the juzgado de paz letrado laboral, in the proceso abreviado laboral, for «las pretensiones referidas al cumplimiento de obligaciones de dar no superiores a setenta Unidades de Referencia Procesal (URP)».
• Above seventy URP: the juzgado especializado de trabajo, in the proceso ordinario laboral, for «las pretensiones referidas al cumplimiento de obligaciones de dar superiores a setenta Unidades de Referencia Procesal (URP)», and generally for «las pretensiones relativas a la protección de derechos individuales, plurales o colectivos, originadas con ocasión de la prestación personal de servicios de naturaleza laboral».
• Whatever the amount, the juzgado de paz letrado laboral hears claims recognising the rights of workers in special regimes: micro and small enterprise, agricultural, construction, domestic workers, land stevedores, non-traditional exports, watchmen and porters, and adolescent workers.
• It also hears, whatever the amount, «los casos de actos de hostilidad del empleador, entendidos como actos de acoso moral y hostigamiento sexual, conforme a la ley de la materia».

We do not convert the URP into soles on this page because we did not verify its current value.

If you are a foreign worker

Article 22 speaks of a worker «sujeto a régimen de la actividad privada, que labore cuatro o más horas diarias para un mismo empleador». It does not distinguish by nationality. If you are on the payroll under the private-sector regime, articles 22, 31, 32, 34, 36 and 38 reach you the same way, and the thirty calendar days run the same way.

If you work fewer than four hours a day, article 22 does not mention you and we did not verify which regime applies. Two nullity grounds do expressly reach below that threshold: pregnancy, birth and breastfeeding (Ley 31152) and a cancer diagnosis (Ley 32431).

What this page cannot tell you

• There is no worked example of the indemnity. The «remuneración ordinaria mensual» that article 38 calculates on is defined in the Regulation, D.S. 001-96-TR, which we could not open at an official source. You get the formula and its article; the exact figure is for a lawyer with your payslips in front of them.
• We do not know the deadline for a reinstatement claim. Article 36 sets thirty calendar days for the indemnity. For a reinstatement claim after a dismissal with no cause or a fraudulent one, we found no official source fixing the period. Assume the shortest one you know of and get advice quickly: getting this wrong costs the whole case.
• We publish no fines. We did not verify that dismissal is a typified infraction Sunafil can fine, so this page carries no fine table. That does not mean none exists; it means we did not confirm one.

Are you still on probation?

The protection against arbitrary dismissal described in this article only kicks in once the probationary period ends (normally 3 months). Check probationary period in Peru: when it ends and what protection you have to find out when it starts applying to you.

Is your contract fixed-term?

A fixed-term contract becomes indefinite (desnaturalización) if you keep working after it expires, if it exceeds the legal maximum, or if the job is actually permanent. Check fixed-term contracts in Peru: when they become indefinite to see if this applies to your case before evaluating an unfair dismissal claim.

Were you dismissed for taking part in a strike?

If the strike met the legal requirements (labor cause, majority, advance notice), a dismissal for taking part in it may be challengeable. Check strikes in Peru: requirements for a legal strike to see if your case qualifies.

Is the dismissal related to your disability?

A dismissal motivated by disability can qualify as discriminatory, on top of being unfair. Check disability and work in Peru: employment quota and reasonable accommodations to learn your rights.

What about truncated vacation pay if you’re dismissed?

If you’re unfairly dismissed, besides the indemnity you’re also owed your truncated vacation pay and, if applicable, any unused vacation record. See how it’s calculated in truncated vacation pay in Peru: how it’s calculated when you leave.

Were you asked to sign a ‘mutual agreement’ instead of being dismissed?

Sometimes what looks like a dismissal is dressed up as a voluntary agreement to avoid paying the indemnity. Before signing any exit document, see mutual agreement termination in Peru: what to sign and what not to.