A primer on labor protections amid layoffs at large companies: understanding at a glance the legal definitions and calculation standards of N, N+1, and 2N

Against the backdrop of mass layoffs at major companies, the debate over N, N+1, and 2N is not essentially about whether a company is being “generous,” but about whether the termination or rescission of an employment contract complies with the law and which statutory compensation or damages standard applies. The core conclusion is clear: layoff compensation has strict legal boundaries. Not every layoff automatically equals N+1, and it is certainly not the online rumor of “at least 2N as a starting point.” Under the framework of Articles 46, 47, 40, and 87 of the Labor Contract Law, N is the most common standard and applies to most lawful terminations or rescissions; N+1 applies only to specific no‑fault terminations where the employer fails to give 30 days’ prior written notice, adding one month’s pay in lieu of notice on top of N; and 2N corresponds to unlawful termination or rescission, constituting damages for illegal conduct, not an “upgraded compensation” for normal layoffs. This distinction directly affects whether workers can correctly assess their rights and sets the floor for negotiation and rights protection. Whether it is economic layoffs at N, mutual termination at N, N+1 termination without prior notice, or 2N damages arising from illegal procedures or grounds, the key is not the labels used in company documents such as “optimization,” “graduation,” or “layoff package,” but whether the method, grounds, and procedures meet legal requirements. Understanding layoff compensation standards and the formulas and conditions for N+1 and 2N helps workers avoid conceptual traps in an uncertain job market and accurately assess compliance and whether to assert further rights—this is the most practical and important purpose of labor law education today.

Core Conclusion: A One-Table Guide to Understanding the Differences Between N, N+1, and 2N

N, N+1, and 2N are not benefit packages that companies can “give as they please,” but statutory compensation/damages standards corresponding to different situations of labor contract termination or rescission. The first step in judgment is not to look at whether the company announcement says “optimization,” “graduation,” or “layoffs,” but to examine whether the termination method is lawful and whether it constitutes mutual agreement termination, economic layoffs, no-fault termination, or unlawful termination.

The most easily confused point is: not all layoffs are N+1. According to explanations from labor dispute lawyers interviewed by CCTV News, N+1 applies only under specific prerequisites; common situations such as economic layoffs and mutual agreement terminations usually correspond to N, while only unlawful termination may correspond to 2N. The article How to Calculate “Severance N+1” also emphasizes that N, N+1, and 2N apply in different scenarios and cannot be used interchangeably.

In one sentence: Most lawful terminations look to N; only Article 40 cases without 30 days’ prior notice may be N+1; unlawful termination is when 2N applies. The so-called “2N+1” is not a fixed formula prescribed by the Labor Contract Law; in practice, it is more often a negotiation outcome or an employer-specific plan and cannot be directly equated with a statutory amount that employees are necessarily entitled to claim.

N Compensation: The Most Common Severance Standard

N compensation is, in essence, the “economic compensation” stipulated in the Labor Contract Law. It is not an extra benefit granted by the company, nor is it damages for unlawful termination. It corresponds to the basic compensation that an employer must pay to an employee when terminating or ending an employment contract under legally prescribed conditions. According to Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law, economic compensation is generally calculated based on the employee’s years of service with the employer: one month’s salary for each full year of service; more than six months but less than one year is counted as one year; less than six months is compensated with half a month’s salary. High-income employees may also be subject to the “three times the average social wage, capped at twelve years” rule. The Shanghai Municipal Development and Reform Commission has also explained this economic compensation calculation standard on its public website.

This is why, in many layoff news stories involving large companies, the plans ultimately boil down to “N” at the legal level, rather than “N+1” or “2N.” If a company chooses routes such as mutual agreement termination, lawful economic layoffs, or non-renewal upon contract expiration, the core obligation is usually to pay economic compensation. Only in specific non-fault terminations where the employer fails to provide 30 days’ prior written notice does the “+1” payment in lieu of notice come into play. If the termination itself is unlawful, then the discussion may shift to “2N” damages. In its legal education materials, the Wuxi human resources and social security authorities also refer to “N” as the most common basic compensation, and clearly state that its calculation is based on years of service and the average wage over the 12 months prior to termination.

Therefore, when assessing whether a layoff plan is reasonable, the first step is not to look at whether the company writes “N,” “N+1,” or “package,” but to examine the reason and procedure for termination: Is the company terminating by mutual agreement, or conducting an economic layoff? Have notification, explanation, and reporting procedures been fulfilled? Are there special protected situations—such as pregnancy, medical treatment periods, or work-related injury—where termination is prohibited? These facts directly determine the nature of the compensation standard.

Simply put: N is the basic compensation for lawful termination or expiration of an employment contract; N+1 is “economic compensation + payment in lieu of notice” in specific situations; and 2N refers to damages for unlawful termination. When judging specific scenarios, the key is not how the company labels it, but whether the termination complies with statutory requirements.

Which Situations Legally Require Only Paying N (Mutual Termination, Economic Layoffs, etc.)

First, let’s clarify a common misconception: “Being laid off” does not automatically mean N+1. The “+1” in N+1 refers to payment in lieu of notice, which applies only to specific termination scenarios stipulated in Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law when the employer fails to provide 30 days’ prior written notice. By contrast, mutual termination, economic layoffs, and certain cases of contract expiration generally correspond by law to N, i.e., statutory economic compensation. CCTV’s coverage citing lawyers’ interpretations also notes that situations such as economic layoffs and expiration of labor contracts apply the N compensation standard, while N+1 has strict prerequisites.

When we say “only need to pay N,” we mean the statutory minimum economic compensation. If a company voluntarily offers N+1, N+3, or other N+X amounts for reasons such as employee relations, retention, or quickly reaching an agreement, that is a management or negotiation arrangement, not a legal mandate.

Common scenarios involving “N compensation” can be understood as follows:

Among these, economic layoffs are the most commonly misunderstood in large-scale corporate layoffs. Under Article 41 of the Labor Contract Law, an economic layoff cannot be justified by a simple claim of “business adjustment.” Specific reasons and procedures must be met: for example, reducing staff by more than 20 employees, or reducing fewer than 20 employees but accounting for more than 10% of the total workforce. The employer must also explain the situation to the trade union or all employees 30 days in advance, solicit opinions, and report the layoff plan to the labor administrative authority. Cases from the Shanghai 12348 Public Legal Service Hotline likewise make clear that when an employer conducts an economic layoff in accordance with the law, economic compensation should be paid based on the employee’s years of service with the company.

Therefore, if an internet company conducts an economic layoff in accordance with the law due to business line contraction, operational difficulties, or organizational restructuring, the statutory compensation is typically N. However, two boundaries should be noted:

1. Only lawful procedures support the “N” outcome
   If the company meets the conditions for an economic layoff and fulfills procedures such as explanation, solicitation of opinions, and reporting, the compensation standard usually falls at N.
   Conversely, if the company lacks a lawful basis, fails to follow procedures, or terminates employees who are legally protected from dismissal—such as those who are pregnant, on maternity leave, or in the breastfeeding period—it may trigger disputes over unlawful termination, where the standard may shift to 2N.
2. Mutual termination is not unilateral layoff
   In practice, many companies do not follow formal economic layoff procedures but instead ask employees to sign a Mutual Termination Agreement. In such cases, as long as the termination is proposed by the employer and both parties reach a genuine, voluntary agreement, the legal basis is typically still N. Employees may refuse, or continue negotiating over compensation, termination date, year-end bonuses, non-compete arrangements, and the cutoff date for social insurance and housing fund contributions; but from a statutory baseline perspective, mutual termination does not automatically generate a “+1.”

Non-renewal upon contract expiration also depends on circumstances. When a fixed-term labor contract expires and the company does not renew, N should generally be paid. However, if the company offers renewal on the same or better terms as the original contract and the employee refuses, this usually does not constitute a situation where the company must pay economic compensation. This detail is critical in practice: even though both are “non-renewal,” it depends on who refuses and whether the renewal terms are reduced.

To determine whether you fall under “legally only N,” you can assess in this order:

1. First, look at the termination method: mutual termination, economic layoff, contract expiration, or unilateral termination under Article 40?
2. Next, check whether the company provided 30 days’ prior written notice: only the three Article 40 scenarios without prior notice involve the “+1” payment in lieu of notice.
3. Finally, assess legality and compliance: invalid reasons, missing procedures, or termination of protected employees may escalate an N dispute into a 2N dispute over unlawful termination.

In one sentence: N is the most common economic compensation standard in lawful termination or expiration of labor contracts; N+1 is not a “standard configuration” for all layoffs, but the result of specific statutory scenarios where prior notice was not given.

-----

The Calculation Formula for N: Years of Service × Average Monthly Salary

Standard formula: N compensation amount = years of service × average monthly salary.
Here, “N” essentially corresponds to the employee’s years of service with the employer. Economic compensation is usually calculated according to the standard of “one month’s salary for each full year of service.”

When calculating N, first focus on two variables: years of service and average monthly salary. According to the commonly applied calculation rules under Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law, years of service are not simply rounded by calendar years, but are converted as follows:

The average monthly salary generally refers to the average salary over the 12 months preceding the termination or expiration of the labor contract. CCTV.com’s legal interpretation of the “N+1” calculation standard also notes that the salary base for N is usually calculated based on the employee’s average pre-tax salary over the previous twelve months. Items that form part of total wages—such as year-end bonuses and the employee’s personal contributions to social insurance and housing funds—should in principle also be included in the calculation (see the relevant interpretation by CCTV.com).

In practice, you can calculate it in these four steps:

1. Determine the start date and termination date: Only calculate the continuous years of service “with the same employer,” focusing on verifying labor contracts, social insurance records, and payroll/bank statements.
2. Convert the years of service N: Each full year counts as one year; for the remaining period, 6 months or more is counted as 1 year, less than 6 months as 0.5 year.
3. Calculate the average salary for the previous 12 months: Add up all wage-related income for the 12 months before termination and divide by 12.
4. Apply the formula:
   N compensation amount = converted years of service × average monthly salary for the previous 12 months

Two common misconceptions are particularly likely to affect the amount:

• Misconception 1: Calculating only based on basic salary.
  Many compensation breakdowns list only “basic salary,” but when calculating economic compensation, it is usually inappropriate to look solely at the basic salary stated in the labor contract. Wage-related income shown on payslips and bank statements—such as fixed salary, performance pay, bonuses, and allowances/subsidies—should also be considered. If the employer clearly suppresses the base by using only “basic salary,” you should require them to specify the calculation basis.
• Misconception 2: Performance bonuses and year-end bonuses are never included.
  It cannot be said categorically that “bonuses are never counted.” If performance bonuses and year-end bonuses form part of labor remuneration and fall within the 12-month salary statistics period, they should generally be included in the average salary base. Conversely, whether reimbursements, temporary benefits, and non-wage subsidies are included depends on the payment description, internal policies, and notes on bank statements.
  -----

Calculation Example: How to Calculate N for 2.5 Years of Work with a Monthly Salary of 10,000

First, translate the rules into numbers: Amount of N = Converted years of service × Average monthly wage for the 12 months prior to termination. Years of service are not simply multiplied as “decimal years,” but are converted according to Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law: each full year counts as 1 year; any remaining period of 6 months or more counts as 1 year; any remaining period of less than 6 months counts as 0.5 year. CCTV has also clearly explained “N,” noting that service of less than half a year is calculated as 0.5, half a year or more as 1, and that the compensation base is usually the pre-tax average wage over the previous 12 months; year-end bonuses and the employee’s personal contributions to social insurance and housing fund may also be included in total wages.

Case 1: 2.5 Years of Work, Average Monthly Wage of 10,000

Assume the employee has worked at the company for 2 years and 6 months, and the average wage over the 12 months prior to termination is 10,000 per month.

The calculation steps are as follows:

1. Convert the years of service

• Full 2 years = compensation of 2 months’ wages;
• The remaining 6 months fall under “6 months or more but less than 1 year,” counted as 1 year;
• Therefore, N = 2 + 1 = 3.

1. Substitute into the formula

• N compensation = 3 × 10,000
• Final amount = 30,000

So when many people say “2.5 years is calculated as 3 years,” the reason is this: 2.5 years is not compensated as 2.5 months of wages; rather, because the remaining period is exactly 6 months, it is legally rounded up to 1 year.

Case 2: 5 Years of Work, Average Monthly Wage of 20,000

Assume the employee has worked at the company for a full 5 years, and the average wage over the 12 months prior to termination is 20,000 per month.

The calculation steps are as follows:

1. Convert the years of service

• Full 5 years, with no remainder;
• Therefore, N = 5.

1. Substitute into the formula

• N compensation = 5 × 20,000
• Final amount = 100,000

This case is straightforward: as long as the years of service are whole years, compensation is calculated based on the corresponding number of years, without needing to address rounding for “6 months or more” or “less than 6 months.”

Another Remainder That Is Easy to Miscalculate: 5 Years and 4 Months of Work, Average Monthly Wage of 20,000

If the length of service is not exactly 5 years, but 5 years and 4 months:

• Full 5 years = 5;
• Remaining 4 months, less than 6 months, counted as 0.5 year;
• N = 5 + 0.5 = 5.5;
• N compensation = 5.5 × 20,000 = 110,000.

This example is a reminder: not all remainders are rounded up to 1 year. The key is whether the remaining months reach 6 months.

In actual calculations, you also need to pay attention to an upper cap: if your average monthly wage exceeds three times the local average monthly wage of employees in the previous year, the wage base for economic compensation may be capped at “three times the social average wage,” and in high-salary situations, the compensable years are usually capped at 12 years. In other words, high-income employees cannot simply multiply their actual monthly salary by N; it is best to also check the local social average wage standard and the calculation details provided by the employer.

N+1 Compensation: Why There Is an “Extra 1 Month of Salary”

N+1 is not a “standard package for layoffs,” nor is it an extra bonus paid on top of N to reward employees. Its legal logic is more accurately described as:

N+1 = Economic Compensation N + 1 Month of Payment in Lieu of Notice

The “+1” here is usually referred to as payment in lieu of notice. It corresponds to situations where an employer, when terminating a labor contract under specific circumstances, is legally required to give the employee 30 days’ prior written notice. If the company does not give advance notice and instead wants the employment relationship to end as soon as possible, it must pay an additional one month’s salary to substitute for that 30-day notice period.

Under Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law, N+1 mainly appears in the following three categories of no-fault termination scenarios:

1. The employee becomes ill or suffers a non–work-related injury, and after the medical treatment period expires, can neither perform the original job nor take up another job arranged by the employer;
2. The employee is not competent for the job and remains incompetent even after training or a job adjustment;
3. The objective circumstances on which the labor contract was based have undergone significant changes, making the contract impossible to perform, and after consultation the parties still cannot reach agreement on amending the contract.

In other words, it is not the case that a company must automatically pay N+1 whenever it “lays off” employees. CCTV.com, in interviews with labor dispute lawyers, has also pointed out that the application of N+1 has strict prerequisites: in the above three situations, only if the company unilaterally terminates the contract without giving 30 days’ prior notice does it need to pay N+1; if it has already given 30 days’ notice, it usually only needs to pay N, not N+1 (see CCTV.com’s explanation of N+1 severance compensation).

A simple decision framework can help clarify this:

In practice, companies often choose to directly pay this one month’s salary, and the reasons are not complicated: giving 30 days’ notice means the employee remains on the job for another month, during which issues such as access control, work handover, team stability, information security, and management costs arise. For certain positions, companies may prefer to complete handover on the same day, shut down system access, and reduce uncertainty, so they choose to pay payment in lieu of notice to replace the notice period.

However, there are two points that are often confused:

• Economic layoffs do not automatically mean N+1. Lawful economic layoffs usually correspond to N. Although some layoff procedures also involve advance explanation or notice requirements, this is not the same as the “30 days’ prior notice or one month’s salary” payment-in-lieu-of-notice rule under Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law.
• N+1 in negotiated terminations is often a negotiation package, not necessarily a statutory obligation. The “N+1 packages” commonly seen in large-company layoffs, if they are essentially negotiated terminations proposed by the company and agreed to by the employee, may include the “+1” as a condition offered to facilitate agreement, rather than because the law mandates it.

In addition, attention should be paid to the salary base used for the “+1”: it is not exactly the same as that used for N. N is usually calculated based on the average salary over the 12 months prior to termination; whereas payment in lieu of notice, in many practical interpretations, is closer to the concept of “an additional one month’s salary paid to the employee.” Some professional interpretations believe that its standard is usually determined by the salary of the month immediately preceding termination, and it does not follow the same logic as economic compensation, such as the three-times-local-average-salary cap (see Tenghe Law’s explanation of N, N+1, and 2N). Therefore, when you see “N+1” in a separation agreement, do not just look at the total number of months—also check carefully whether the salary base for N and the salary base for the +1 have been mixed together and reduced.

Applicable Situations: Inability to Perform the Job, Changes in Objective Circumstances, etc.

N+1 mainly corresponds to the “no-fault termination” under Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law: the employee has not committed serious misconduct and is not resigning voluntarily, but due to specific reasons, the labor contract has become difficult to continue performing. In such cases, the employer may legally terminate the labor contract, but must meet procedural requirements—provide the employee with 30 days’ prior written notice, or pay an additional one month’s salary in lieu of notice. If the employer has already given 30 days’ prior written notice, it usually only pays N; if it wants the employee to leave immediately, this typically results in N+1.

Key point: N+1 is not the “standard configuration” for all layoffs. Based on practical summaries, N+1 in its true statutory sense is concentrated in the three situations stipulated in Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law, and only on the premise that the employer did not provide 30 days’ prior written notice. Relevant application scenarios can be referenced in the summary of applicable situations for N+1 in labor dispute rules.

The three common scenarios are as follows:

1. The employee is unable to perform the job and remains unable to do so after training or job reassignment

This is not something an employer can establish simply by saying “poor performance.” In practice, the company usually needs to first prove that job responsibilities and assessment standards are clear, then prove that the employee indeed failed to meet the requirements, and that reasonable opportunities for improvement were provided, such as training arrangements, performance coaching, or reassignment to a more suitable position.

For example, if a product manager fails to meet performance targets for two consecutive quarters, the company cannot directly notify them on the same day, “You are not competent; you leave today.” A more compliant approach is usually: first issue performance results and an improvement plan, arrange training or job adjustment; if the employee still cannot meet job requirements after a reasonable period, the company may then terminate under Article 40. At this point, if the company did not issue a written termination notice 30 days in advance, it needs to pay an additional one month’s salary in lieu of notice on top of N.

The risk here is that if the employer lacks objective assessment evidence, or if the so-called “job reassignment” involves an obvious pay cut or humiliating arrangements, the employee can challenge the validity of the termination reason, and the dispute may escalate from N+1 to a determination of unlawful termination.

1. A material change in the objective circumstances on which the labor contract was based, making the contract impossible to perform

This category is very common in business contraction, organizational restructuring, and project cancellation at large companies, but it does not automatically apply just because the company “wants to optimize staffing.” A so-called material change in objective circumstances usually must reach the level of affecting the continued performance of the labor contract, such as the overall shutdown of a business line, cross-city relocation of the workplace, cancellation of the project on which the position depends, or substantial adjustments to the company’s organizational structure.

More importantly, the company cannot skip the consultation process. Generally, it should first communicate with the employee about whether the labor contract can be modified, such as adjusting the position, work location, reporting relationship, or compensation structure; only if both parties cannot reach agreement on the modification may the employer enter the Article 40 termination pathway.

For example, if an internet company shuts down its local operations team and retains only centralized support roles at headquarters, the company can first propose reassignment or relocation options. If the employee disagrees due to family, commuting, or compensation changes and negotiations fail, the company may then lawfully terminate. If the company requires the employee to hand over work and leave on the same day without providing 30 days’ prior written notice, it usually needs to pay N+1. Relevant interpretations from Tianjin labor legal services also emphasize that only when termination is based on Article 40 and there is no 30 days’ prior written notice does the “+1” in N+1 come into play.

1. Illness or non-work-related injury, where after the medical treatment period expires the employee cannot perform the original job or any other job arranged by the employer

This category is often misunderstood as “if an employee gets sick, the company can terminate.” This is not the case. While an employee is within the statutory medical treatment period, the employer generally cannot terminate at will; even after the medical treatment period expires, it is still necessary to see whether the employee can return to the original position or is capable of performing an appropriate alternative position arranged by the company.

For example, after completing the medical treatment period for a non-work-related illness, a software engineer is advised by a doctor not to work long hours or night shifts. The company should first assess whether the employee can return to the original position, or whether there are positions that do not require night shifts, such as development without on-call duties, testing, documentation, or internal support roles. Only if the employee truly cannot perform the original job and cannot handle any other arranged work may the company terminate under Article 40. If the company does not provide 30 days’ prior written notice and instead seeks immediate termination of the labor contract, it must additionally pay one month’s salary in lieu of notice.

In practice, when determining N+1, a simple framework can be applied: first, check whether the termination reason falls under the three situations in Article 40; second, check whether the employer has fulfilled the prerequisite procedures; finally, check whether 30 days’ prior written notice was given. If the reason does not fall under Article 40—such as mutual agreement termination, economic layoffs, or non-renewal upon contract expiration—the “+1” usually does not automatically arise; if it does fall under Article 40 but the company has already provided 30 days’ prior written notice, it is usually just N, not N+1.

Practical Calculation Examples of N+1

When calculating N+1, the most common mistake is to understand it as “paying one extra N” or “stacking two compensation items.” More accurately, N refers to economic compensation, and +1 refers to payment in lieu of notice: the former compensates the employee for their years of service with the employer, while the latter is the cost of substituting a one‑month salary for the notice period when the employer fails to provide 30 days’ prior written notice. In practice, the standard for “payment in lieu of notice” is usually determined based on the employee’s salary for normal working time in the previous month, and is not entirely the same as the average monthly wage used for calculating N. Some legal practice articles also explicitly note that the calculation standards for payment in lieu of notice and economic compensation are different.

For example:

The first case is relatively straightforward: the employee has worked at the company for a full 3 years, so N equals 3 months of salary, i.e., 45,000 RMB. If the company terminates the employment under Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law but fails to provide 30 days’ prior written notice, it must additionally pay one month of payment in lieu of notice of 15,000 RMB, for a total of 60,000 RMB.

The second case is closer to real-life situations: the employee has worked for 2 years and 7 months, and the length of service for N is usually calculated as 3 months. However, the “+1” does not necessarily equal the average monthly wage used for N. If the employee’s average salary over the past 12 months is 20,000 RMB due to bonuses or commissions, while the normal salary in the last month before termination is 18,000 RMB, then the N portion is calculated based on 20,000 RMB, while the payment in lieu of notice portion may be calculated based on 18,000 RMB.

Key conclusion: N+1 is not “double compensation,” but rather “economic compensation N + one month’s salary for failure to provide prior notice.”

Therefore, when reviewing the N+1 breakdown provided by the company, it is recommended to verify it in two steps: first, check whether the length of service and the average monthly wage used for N are calculated correctly; second, separately check whether the “+1” is listed based on the normal monthly salary. Do not look only at whether the total amount is roughly correct, and do not assume that items labeled in HR forms as “compensation,” “settlement fees,” or “severance packages” all have the same legal nature.

-----

2N Compensation: The Cost of Unlawful Termination of an Employment Contract by a Company

2N is not an “upgraded version of layoff compensation,” but compensation borne by a company when it unlawfully terminates or unlawfully ends an employment contract. Its legal nature is completely different from N and N+1: N is economic compensation, typically corresponding to lawful termination or expiration; N+1 applies in certain lawful termination scenarios, where one month’s wages are paid in lieu of 30 days’ prior written notice; whereas the prerequisite for 2N is that—the company’s termination itself is determined to be unlawful.

Article 87 of the Labor Contract Law establishes the core logic of 2N: where an employer violates the law in terminating or ending an employment contract, it shall pay compensation to the employee at twice the economic compensation standard. An analysis on layoffs by Beijing Zhongce Law Firm also cites this rule, stating that in cases of unlawful termination or ending, compensation is calculated at twice the economic compensation standard under Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law, and that economic compensation and compensation damages cannot be applied simultaneously.

The differences among the three can be understood as follows:

In practice, typical situations in which employees may consider claiming 2N include:

• The company has no statutory grounds for termination and directly notifies the employee to “leave today” or says “the position is canceled, no need to come anymore”;
• The company terminates on the grounds of “serious violation of rules” or “incompetence,” but cannot produce institutional rules, assessment records, or evidence of training or reassignment;
• An economic layoff fails to meet substantive conditions or procedural requirements, such as not reaching the statutory threshold for layoffs but being packaged as an “economic layoff”;
• Termination of employees in specially protected periods such as pregnancy, maternity, breastfeeding, or medical treatment, where no legally permitted exception applies;
• The company coerces the employee into signing a “voluntary resignation for personal reasons,” when in fact it is a unilateral dismissal, and there are chat records, recordings, emails, or other evidence that can reconstruct the process.

However, it should be noted that “feeling that the company is unreasonable” does not necessarily constitute unlawful termination in legal terms. For example, if a company lawfully conducts an economic layoff, fulfills the explanation and reporting procedures, and pays N according to the standard, 2N does not automatically arise; likewise, termination under Article 40 with payment of N+1 does not equate to illegality. The key to 2N is not whether the employee is satisfied with the arrangement, but whether arbitration or the court determines that the company’s termination lacks a lawful basis, sufficient evidence, or complies with procedures.

Another common misconception is “2N+1.” From a legal structure perspective, 2N and “+1” generally cannot be stacked: “+1” corresponds to pay in lieu of notice in lawful termination, while 2N corresponds to compensation damages for unlawful termination; the scenarios in which they apply are different. Lawyer Q&As also clearly point out that 2N+1 or 2(N+1) are not statutory payment models. In practice, N+3 or N+6 arrangements are more often commercial solutions offered by companies to quickly reach a settlement, rather than legally mandated standards; see the related explanation on the rules of N, N+1, and 2N in labor disputes.

Therefore, when deciding whether to claim 2N, employees should first conduct a three-step verification:

1. Review the termination reason: Does the company’s written notice cite layoff, mutual termination, serious violation, incompetence, or contract expiration? Different reasons correspond to different legal paths.
2. Review the evidence chain: Does the company have rules and regulations, assessment records, training or reassignment records, materials evidencing operational difficulties, and procedures for informing the union or employees?
3. Review the choice of claims: In cases of unlawful termination, employees can usually choose to request continued performance of the employment contract; only if continued performance is not requested, or is objectively impossible, does the discussion of 2N compensation arise.

In one sentence: N and N+1 address “how much to pay in lawful termination,” while 2N addresses “what price a company must pay for unlawful termination.” In negotiations, 2N can be used as leverage to assess the company’s risk of illegality; but in formal rights protection, claims must be built around the facts, evidence, and legal basis of “unlawful termination,” rather than treating 2N as a standard automatically available in all layoff scenarios.
-----

Circumstances That May Be Deemed Unlawful Termination

When determining whether 2N compensation can be claimed, the core issue is not whether the company is “laying off staff,” but whether the termination of the labor contract simultaneously satisfies statutory grounds and statutory procedures. In its explanations of N, N+1, and 2N, the Wuxi Human Resources and Social Security authorities have also clearly stated that where an employer’s reasons for terminating or ending a labor contract do not meet statutory conditions, or where procedures are unlawful, this may involve unlawful termination or termination with payment of compensation.

Common high-risk scenarios include:

• No lawful reason, directly notifying the employee that they are “terminated”
  For example, a company notifies an employee on the same day to leave on the grounds of “organizational optimization,” “position mismatch,” or “team adjustment,” without explaining the corresponding statutory basis for termination, and without providing evidence such as incompetence, serious misconduct, or a material change in objective circumstances.
  The risk in such cases is that an employer cannot replace legal grounds with management jargon. “Position elimination” does not automatically justify unilateral termination, and “poor performance” usually requires supporting evidence such as clear assessment criteria, assessment records, and records of training or reassignment.
• Layoffs carried out in the name of “economic layoffs” without fulfilling the required procedures
  Economic layoffs cannot be initiated merely because a company claims “business difficulties.” Lawful layoffs usually require specific statutory conditions and procedures, including explaining the situation to the trade union or all employees, soliciting opinions, and reporting to the labor administrative authorities; a relevant page of the Shanghai Development and Reform Commission also summarizes that during layoffs, employers must notify employees in advance and pay severance.
  A simple example: a company eliminates an entire department of 40 people at once, but only asks employees to sign “mutual termination agreements,” and those who refuse to sign later receive unilateral termination notices. If the company cannot prove that it meets the conditions for economic layoffs or that it has fulfilled the required procedures, the terminations face a risk of being deemed unlawful.
• Unilateral termination of employees during pregnancy, maternity leave, or breastfeeding
  For example, after an employee has informed the company of her pregnancy, the company terminates the labor contract on the grounds of “position optimization”; or while an employee is on maternity leave, the company notifies her that the “project has ended and the position will no longer be retained.”
  For employees in the “three periods,” the law generally provides stronger protection. Even if an enterprise does have operational adjustments, it cannot simply terminate on the grounds of layoffs or position elimination. In practice, further scrutiny is applied as to whether exceptions such as serious misconduct exist and whether the company has sufficient evidence.
• Termination during the statutory medical treatment period on the grounds of “inability to report to work”
  For example, an employee takes sick leave due to illness and submits supporting documentation, the medical treatment period has not yet expired, and the company terminates on the grounds that “long-term absence affects business operations.”
  Termination during the medical treatment period often carries high risk. Even after the medical treatment period expires, employers usually must go through an assessment process such as determining that the employee “cannot perform the original job and cannot perform other work arranged,” rather than directly treating sick leave as absenteeism or incompetence.
• Termination for “serious misconduct” where there are obvious defects in policies or evidence
  For example, a company terminates for “violating attendance rules,” but the relevant rules were never publicized or trained; or the company alleges information leakage based only on chat screenshots, without investigation records, access logs, or explanations of losses.
  Termination for serious misconduct typically does not involve payment of economic compensation and is therefore a high-dispute area. Arbitration tribunals or courts will focus on whether the rules were lawfully formulated and communicated to employees, whether the facts of misconduct are clear, whether the punishment is manifestly excessive, and whether the handling process complies with company policies.
• Forcing resignation through reassignment, pay cuts, or suspension, then claiming the employee “voluntarily resigned”
  For example, a company suddenly transfers an employee from a technical role to a clearly unsuitable position while significantly reducing salary; after the employee raises objections, the company demands that they “resign if they do not accept.”
  If a so-called “voluntary resignation” is formed under obvious pressure or disguised coercion, the employee may rely on materials such as chat records, reassignment notices, salary changes, and attendance arrangements to argue that the resignation was not truly voluntary.

It should be noted that the above are only typical scenarios that may give rise to disputes over unlawful termination and do not mean that the presence of similar circumstances will necessarily result in 2N compensation. In practice, whether an unlawful termination is established usually depends on a comprehensive review of evidence such as the labor contract, internal rules, termination notices, communication records, attendance and performance records, and medical or maternity documentation, as determined by labor arbitration institutions or courts. For employees, the most important step after receiving a termination notice is not to immediately argue whether the company is acting unlawfully, but to first preserve evidence: retain written notices, emails/OA workflows, chat records, audio recordings, payroll records, and social insurance records, and then decide whether to claim continued performance of the labor contract or compensation for unlawful termination.

How to Calculate 2N: Its Relationship with N

2N is not a separate formula; rather, it means “compensation = statutory severance (N) × 2.” In other words, the calculation of 2N only comes into play when an employer’s termination or ending of a labor contract is determined to be unlawful. Even then, N is first calculated according to the rules for statutory severance, and only then multiplied by 2. The Wuxi human resources and social security authorities have also clearly stated in their explanation of N, N+1, and 2N that compensation for unlawful termination or ending of a labor contract is paid at twice the statutory severance standard, namely compensation (2N) = statutory severance (N) × 2.

Here is a complete example:

Assume an employee has worked at a company for 4 years, with an average monthly salary of RMB 12,000 over the 12 months prior to termination, and no special circumstances such as salary caps apply.

Therefore, in this example, if the termination is ultimately determined to be unlawful, the compensation the employee may claim is RMB 96,000.

The point most easily confused here is that 2N is still based on the calculation rules for N. How years of service are converted, how the wage base is determined, and whether the local average social wage cap of three times applies will all affect N first, and then further affect 2N. Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law, which sets out the rules on years of service and wage base for statutory severance, forms the basis for calculating N—for example, one month’s wages are paid for each full year of service; service of six months or more but less than one year is counted as one year; service of less than six months is compensated at half a month’s wages. Relevant rules can also be found in the Shanghai Development and Reform Commission’s excerpt on the standards for calculating statutory severance.

It should also be noted that in real-world negotiations, some companies may propose arrangements such as “2N+1,” “N+3,” or a “lump-sum package.” Such terms are usually negotiation outcomes in consensual termination or dispute settlements and do not automatically correspond to mandatory legal standards. In particular, “2N+1” is not a fixed statutory combination under strict legal logic: 2N corresponds to compensation for unlawful termination, while the “+1” usually corresponds to payment in lieu of 30 days’ prior notice in specific lawful termination scenarios, and the prerequisites for applying the two are not the same. If a company is willing to pay more than the statutory standard, employees should review the arrangement holistically—considering payment timing, separation certificates, non-compete clauses, confidentiality obligations, and dispute waiver clauses—rather than focusing solely on the superficial “N multiple.”

Key Details in Layoff Compensation Calculations: Length-of-Service Conversion and Wage Caps

When calculating layoff compensation, many people focus only on “how many years worked” and “monthly salary.” However, what often truly affects the amount are two capping rules: whether the wage base is capped at three times the local average social wage, and whether the compensation period is capped at a maximum of 12 years. These two rules mainly apply to high-income employees; not all employees automatically fall under the “12-year cap.”

According to Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law, if an employee’s monthly wage is higher than three times the average monthly wage of employees in the employer’s locality for the previous year, the wage base for economic compensation is calculated at that three-times amount, and the number of years for which economic compensation is paid shall not exceed 12 years. The Shanghai Municipal Development and Reform Commission website also cites this rule, clearly setting out the standards for economic compensation paid based on years of service and the dual cap for high wages.

This can be understood as a screening step:

Here, “monthly wage” usually refers to the average wage over the 12 months prior to the termination or expiration of the labor contract. In practice, this typically follows the gross-pay standard, including wages, bonuses, and allowances or subsidies and other monetary income. However, items such as overtime pay, sick-leave wages, and living allowances during work stoppages may be treated differently across regions and cases. It is best to verify based on local adjudication standards.

A simplified example: assume the local average monthly wage of employees for the previous year is RMB 15,000, so the three-times cap is RMB 45,000.

• Employee A: Average monthly wage over the 12 months before departure is RMB 80,000; worked at the company for 15 years.
  Because RMB 80,000 exceeds RMB 45,000, the wage base is capped at RMB 45,000 for calculation, and the compensation period is capped at 12 years.
  Simplified calculation result: 45,000 × 12 = RMB 540,000.
• Employee B: Average monthly wage over the 12 months before departure is RMB 40,000; worked at the company for 15 years.
  Because RMB 40,000 does not exceed RMB 45,000, the above “dual cap” generally does not apply. If there are no other special restrictions, it should not be concluded that “compensation is limited to a maximum of 12 months.”

This is also where many high-income employees experience a gap in expectations: the higher the actual monthly wage and the longer the length of service, the more pronounced the difference caused by the capping rules. On the surface, Employee A’s “original estimate” might be based on RMB 80,000 and 15 years, but under lawful calculation it may be compressed to the two dimensions of RMB 45,000 and 12 years.

The conversion of length of service should also be considered together with the capping rules. Generally, the employee’s length of service with the employer is first confirmed, and then the number of compensation months is converted according to the rules: one full year corresponds to one month; more than six months but less than one year is counted as one year; less than six months is counted as half a month. If the employee falls under the high-income capping scenario, the converted number of compensation months is still subject to the “maximum 12 years” limit. For example, if the employee worked for 12 years and 8 months, the converted compensation months might originally exceed 12 months, but under the high-income dual-cap scenario, it is still capped at 12 years.

It is particularly important to note that for long-serving employees who joined before the Labor Contract Law came into effect in 2008 and whose labor contracts were terminated or expired afterward, some cases may involve segmented calculations. Different termination reasons, hiring dates, and local judicial standards can all affect the final amount. When encountering situations such as “length of service of more than ten or even twenty years,” “wages significantly higher than three times the average social wage,” or “the company only pays compensation for 12 months,” do not rely on a single formula. It is recommended to verify at the same time: the local average social wage standard, the reason for termination, the hiring date, the composition of wages, and the company’s calculation details.

Common Misconceptions: Why Many People Misunderstand N, N+1, and 2N

After frequent news of layoffs at large companies, many people mix corporate practices, colleagues’ experiences, and legal rules together, resulting in several high-frequency misunderstandings. The key is to first clarify that N, N+1, and 2N are not “compensation packages where higher tiers are more reasonable,” but legal consequences corresponding to different termination scenarios.

Misconception 1: As long as it’s a layoff, the company must pay N+1.
Fact: This may be the most common misunderstanding. In practice, many companies proactively offer N+1 to quickly reach a mutual termination agreement, and over time employees come to see it as an “industry standard.” From a rules perspective, however, the broad notion of “layoffs” can correspond to different situations such as mutual termination, economic layoffs, or non-renewal upon contract expiration, many of which have a statutory compensation standard of N. CCTV News, in interviews with labor dispute legal practitioners, has also noted that N+1 has strict prerequisites and does not automatically apply to all layoffs; in practice, so-called “layoffs” may also result in negotiated outcomes such as N+X (link).
Simply put, if the company presents a “mutual termination agreement,” the N+1 you see is very likely a negotiation proposal; if it is a statutory unilateral termination, you must further examine the legal grounds and procedures.

Misconception 2: If the company does not give 30 days’ advance notice, it must pay an extra “+1.”
Fact: The “+1” usually refers to pay in lieu of notice, but it is not a universal penalty for all termination scenarios. It most commonly applies when the employer terminates the labor contract under the circumstances listed in Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law and fails to provide 30 days’ written notice in advance—for example, when an employee cannot resume original work or take alternative arrangements after medical leave, remains incompetent after training or reassignment, or when major changes in objective circumstances make contract performance impossible. Relevant interpretations also make it clear that the situations truly requiring N+1 are relatively narrow; it is not the case that “no advance notice = automatic +1.”
For example, if a company negotiates a mutual termination with you due to organizational restructuring and both parties agree on a departure date, this does not automatically equate to a “termination without 30 days’ notice” under Article 40. Whether there is a “+1” in such cases depends more on the agreement’s terms rather than arising automatically.

Misconception 3: 2N+1 or 2(N+1) is a statutory compensation standard.
Fact: Strictly speaking, there is usually no fixed legal formula of “2N+1.” 2N corresponds to compensation for unlawful termination or unlawful ending of a labor contract; “+1” corresponds to pay in lieu of notice in specific lawful termination scenarios where 30 days’ advance notice was not given. Their application logic differs and they cannot simply be stacked. Relevant interpretations from Tianjin labor law services also clearly state that there is no “2N+1” in labor law compensation or indemnity standards (link).
In practice, however, you may hear of colleagues receiving “2N+1.” This does not mean it is a statutory standard; it is more likely a negotiated amount offered by the company to reduce dispute costs, quickly complete departure arrangements, or address case-specific risks. Being able to negotiate it does not mean the law necessarily supports it.

Misconception 4: As long as the company makes me leave, I can directly claim 2N.
Fact: 2N is not an “upgraded layoff compensation,” but a liability for compensation after a finding of unlawful termination or unlawful contract ending. It usually requires an assessment of whether the company had lawful grounds for termination, whether required procedures were followed, and whether special protected circumstances prohibiting termination existed. For example, only when a company fails to state reasons, fabricates serious misconduct, or unlawfully terminates an employee during legally protected periods such as pregnancy, maternity, or breastfeeding might the discussion of 2N arise.
Conversely, if the parties ultimately sign a mutual termination agreement and there are no issues such as fraud or coercion affecting true intent, it often becomes significantly more difficult to later assert a claim for 2N. The core issue here is not “how tough the company’s attitude was,” but whether the termination can be deemed unlawful.

Misconception 5: The wage base for N is calculated only on base salary; bonuses and year-end awards don’t count.
Fact: Many differences in compensation amounts lie not in “how many years N represents,” but in “how the monthly wage base is determined.” Under common understanding, N corresponds to years of service, and the wage base is generally the average salary over the 12 months prior to contract termination or expiration, rather than only the base salary stated in the contract. CCTV News interviews have also noted that N is calculated based on the employee’s pre-tax average salary over the past 12 months, and items such as year-end bonuses and the employee’s personal contributions to social insurance and housing funds are usually included in the total wage calculation.
A common scenario: an employee has a monthly base salary of RMB 20,000, plus quarterly performance bonuses and a year-end bonus. If the company uses only RMB 20,000 as the base, while the actual average pre-tax income over the past 12 months is significantly higher, it becomes necessary to further verify payroll records, bonus payment records, and compensation details. In compensation negotiations, “shrinking the base” is often more hidden than “cutting half a month of N.”

How to Verify Whether Your Severance Is Reasonable After Being Laid Off

After being notified of a layoff, don’t fixate only on the “N+1” outcome. Instead, break the severance into four steps to verify: whether the termination type matches, whether years of service are calculated correctly, whether the monthly wage base is correct, and whether the applicable rules are applied properly. Many disputes don’t stem from the formula itself, but from companies mixing up “mutual termination,” “economic layoffs,” and “unlawful termination,” leaving employees unable to judge whether they should receive N, N+1, or 2N.

You can self-check in the following order:

1. Confirm the type of termination: On what grounds is the company terminating?
   First, review the written materials provided by the company, such as the Notice of Termination of Labor Contract, Mutual Termination Agreement, Layoff Notice, etc.

• If the company proposes a mutual termination and both parties ultimately sign and confirm, the economic compensation is usually based on N.
• If the company terminates based on reasons such as “incompetence” or “material changes in objective circumstances,” and fails to provide 30 days’ prior written notice, this may involve the “+1” in N+1 as payment in lieu of notice.
• If the company lacks lawful grounds or the procedure is clearly improper, this may constitute unlawful termination, corresponding to 2N compensation. According to Article 87 of the Labor Contract Law, where an employer unlawfully terminates or ends a labor contract, it shall pay compensation at twice the standard of economic compensation. This is also clearly explained in a law firm’s analysis of layoff compensation standards.

1. Calculate years of service with the employer: focus on the “6-month” threshold
   N is not rounded arbitrarily; it is calculated based on your length of service with the employer:

• Each full year counts as 1 month of wages;
• More than 6 months but less than 1 year is counted as 1 year;
• Less than 6 months is counted as half a month of wages.

For example, if you worked at the company for 2 years and 7 months, N is usually calculated as 3; if you worked for 2 years and 4 months, N is usually calculated as 2.5.

1. Verify the monthly wage base: it’s not just the base salary
   The “monthly wage” used for compensation generally refers to the average wage over the 12 months preceding the termination or end of the labor contract, not merely the base salary stated in the contract. In practice, you should verify wage statements, bonuses, allowances and subsidies, performance pay, and other income related to wages.

Also note the cap for high-income earners: if an employee’s monthly wage exceeds three times the local average monthly wage of employees in the previous year, the economic compensation may be capped at “three times the average social wage,” and the compensable years of service are capped at 12 years. On this point, you may refer to the explanation of economic compensation calculations for Article 47 of the Labor Contract Law.

1. Apply the N / N+1 / 2N rules to verify the company’s proposal
   You can first estimate using a simplified formula:

Example: An employee’s pre-tax average monthly wage is RMB 20,000, and they have worked at the company for 3 years and 8 months; N is usually calculated as 4. If N applies, compensation is about RMB 80,000; if 2N applies, compensation is about RMB 160,000. If N+1 applies, you must further verify the wage standard for the “+1”; the company cannot simply substitute a figure below the statutory or agreed standard.

If, after verification, you find clear discrepancies—such as the company calculating compensation based only on base salary, deliberately undercounting years of service, giving only verbal notice of termination while refusing to issue written documents, or disguising unlawful termination as “voluntary resignation”—you may consider applying for labor arbitration with the local Labor and Personnel Dispute Arbitration Committee. The materials typically required include:

• Labor contracts, offers, onboarding registration forms, and other materials proving the employment relationship;
• Wage statements, pay slips, individual income tax records, social insurance or housing fund contribution records;
• Termination notices, layoff emails, mutual termination agreements, chat records, OA approval records;
• Attendance records, performance evaluations, position adjustment notices, and other evidence related to the disputed facts;
• Identification documents, company registration information, and other basic materials required for filing a case.

The statute of limitations for applying for labor dispute arbitration is usually one year, generally calculated from the date the party knew or should have known that their rights were infringed. Where there is dispute over timing, you should consult the local arbitration authority or a professional as early as possible to confirm.

Finally, note that this article is labor-protection educational content intended to help you understand the basic verification methods for N, N+1, and 2N. It does not constitute legal advice for a specific case. Whether you can claim 2N, whether it is appropriate to sign a mutual termination agreement, and whether the evidence is sufficient all require a comprehensive assessment based on the termination documents, communication process, company procedures, and local arbitration and adjudication practices.