Why does Native Teams prefer a Mutual Termination Agreement (MTA) over redundancy?

Where legally and practically possible, a Mutual Termination Agreement (MTA) is generally our preferred approach, since it gives both parties a clear, mutually agreed framework for ending the employment relationship — covering the termination date, payments, notice arrangements, and other terms upfront. This:

• Reduces the risk of disputes during the termination process
• Gives greater certainty around the final employment date and financial obligations
• Creates a clear written record both parties agreed to
• Makes offboarding more predictable and efficient for the client, employee, and Native Teams as EOR

Redundancy is often more complex under an EOR structure, since Native Teams — as the legal employer — must ensure any employer-initiated termination is backed by a legally valid business rationale, which can require formal consultation, specific notice and procedural steps, documentation, selection criteria, and potentially additional employee protections depending on the country. Critically, a client's commercial decision alone doesn't automatically count as a legally sufficient redundancy reason — Native Teams has to be able to legally stand behind the termination.

For that reason, an MTA is usually the more straightforward and available path — but this is always assessed country-by-country and case-by-case, with Legal or local experts confirming what's actually permissible.