Ensure the legitimate rights and interests of the workers and build a harmonious labor relationship

Recently, the Supreme People's Court issued a total of 7 instructive cases of the 32nd batch, mainly to protect the legitimate rights and interests of workers, involving labor relations confirmation, year -end award issuance disputes, equal employment rights, etc. Reference (4 of the guidance cases of this newspaper).

Guidance Case No. 179:

Nie Meilan complained that Beijing Lin's Brothers Culture Co., Ltd. confirmed the labor relationship

【Basic Case】

On April 8, 2016, Nie Meilan and Beijing Lin's Brothers Culture Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Lin's Brothers) signed the "Agreement for the Establishment of Tea Management Projects", which was: "1: Both parties agreed, Party A contributed to capital contribution Investment in tea projects, hire Party B as the management project manager of tea, Party B is responsible for the company's management and operation. The second: After the project is started, the two parties have set up a company together. Party B can enjoy management shares. Before the company was established, Party B was paid in accordance with the basic salary plus performance. After the company was established, it was allocated according to the shareholding ratio of both parties. : During the operation of the two parties, the failed matters are resolved by the friendship between the two parties.

After the agreement was signed, Nie Meilan went to the project to work. The work content was responsible for the management of the "Chinese Painting and Calligraphy" art tea club, and it was mainly responsible for reception and tea sales. Linde Tang, the legal representative of the Lin's Brothers Company, shall pay Nie Meilan a natural monthly salary to Nie Meilan on the 15th of each month in accordance with the standard of 10,000 yuan per month. Nie Meilan requested the approve by Linde Tang, and the actual number of daily attendances affected the real amount of salary. On May 6, 2017, the Lin's Brothers notified Nie Meilan to terminate the cooperation agreement. Nie Meilan actually worked until May 8, 2017.

Nie Meilan applied for labor arbitration, believed that the two parties were labor relations and asked the Lin's brothers to pay the wage difference between the wages of the Lin's brothers without signing a written labor contract. Beijing Haidian District Labor and Personnel Dispute Arbitration Committee made a ruling No. 9691 (2017) Nakazi (2017): rejected all Nie Meilan's arbitration request. Nie Meilan refused to accept the arbitration ruling and filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Haidian District People's Court within the statutory period.

【Judgment results】

The Beijing Haidian District People's Court made on April 17, 2018 (2017) Beijing 0108 Minchu No. 45496 Civil Judgment: 1. Confirm that the Lin's Brothers and Nie Meilan and Nie Meilan were from April 8, 2016 to May 8, 2017 There is a labor relationship; 2. The Lin's Brothers pays Nie Meilan from March 1, 2017 to May 8, 2017 within 7 days after the decision is effective; From May 8th, 2016 to April 7, 2017, the wage difference between the labor contract was not signed by 103144.9 yuan; Rejected Nie Meilan's other litigation requests. The Lin's brother company refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and appealed. The Beijing First Intermediate People's Court made on September 26, 2018 (2018) Beijing 01 Public 5911 Civil Judgment: 1. Maintain Beijing Haidian District People's Court (2017) Beijing 0108 Minchu No. 45496 Civil Judgment , The second, fourth item; 2. Revisit the third and fifth item of the Beijing Haidian District People's Court (2017) Beijing 0108 Minchu No. 45496; and the third. The Lin's Brothers did not accept the second trial judgment and applied for a retrial to the Beijing Higher People's Court. The Beijing Higher People's Court made on April 30, 2019 (2019) Jingmin Shenshen No. 986 Civil Ruling: rejected the retrial application of Lin's brothers.

【Guiding significance】

In this case, the employer and the workers shall establish an agreement under the name of "cooperative operation", but if the content of the rights and obligations of both parties agreed in the agreement is compliant with the standard of labor relationship identification, the people's court shall identify the employer and the workers existing Labor relationship. The case is based on the essential elements as the judgment standard. The nature of the contract content signed by the employer and the employer to determine the nature of the rights and obligations signed by the employer and the employer to determine the labor relationship between the two parties, and prevent the employer from using the advantages to establish other contracts through other contracts. Methods cover up the practical use of work, disguise the legal rights given to workers in disguise, and achieve the purpose of better protecting the legitimate rights and interests of workers.

Guidance Case 180:

Sun Xianfeng sued Huai'an West District Human Resources Development Co., Ltd. labor contract dispute case

【Basic Case】

On July 1, 2016, Sun Xianfeng (Party B) signed a labor contract with Huai'an West Human Resources Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Western District) (Party A) (Party A), which stipulated that the term of the labor contract was from July 1, 2016 to 2019 to 2019 By June 30; Party B's work place is Lianyungang and engaged in mailing and driver positions; Party B seriously violates Party A's labor discipline and rules and regulations, and Party A may immediately terminate this contract without sharing any economic compensation; Party A Party A. If the breach of contract is terminated or terminated by the labor contract, it shall be ordered by the provisions of the law and the contract of the contract in accordance with the law and this contract. "" Regulations on the Management of Employees "and other documents are the same as the attachment of this contract, which has the same effect as this contract. After that, Sun Xianfeng was responsible for the dispatch of mail in SF Express in the Tuigou Port Town area of ​​Guannan County, Jiangsu Province. From August 25, 2016, the Western District Company settled the salary of the Sun Xianfeng Bank account every month. As of September 25, 2017, the average salary of Sun Xianfeng's 12 months in the first 12 months was 6329.82 yuan. On September 12th, October 3, and October 16, 2017, Sun Xianfeng had violated disciplinary actions such as working clothes, swipe attendance cards on behalf of others, and leave a message on the unit public platform. Afterwards, the Western District Company jointly signed a confirmation by the person in charge of the company's relevant departments in accordance with the "Regulations on the Management of Reward and Punishment". Determine. On October 17, 2017, Sun Xianfeng was arranged to suspend work on the grounds of the business of the employment department of the unit in a timely manner. The next day, Sun Xianfeng went to the unit to check the card and showed that the credit card information could not be entered. On October 25, the Western District Company issued a certificate of departure that Sun Xianfeng officially resigned from the Western District Company on October 21, 2017, and has completed the procedures. From now on, there is no labor relationship with the company. On October 30, the Western District Company issued a notice of lifting a labor contract, which stated that Sun Xianfeng had not been absent from work for more than 3 days from October 20, 2017 without the approval of any leadership. Laws, regulations and units rules and regulations have decided to terminate the labor relationship with Sun Xianfeng from October 20, 2017. It is limited to the relevant procedures before November 15, 2017. The overdue is not handled, and the consequences are at their own risk. Later, Sun Xianfeng applied for arbitration to the labor dispute arbitration committee of Guannan County, Jiangsu Province. After the arbitration, Sun Xianfeng refused to accept it and asked the court to pay a total of 6,8500 yuan for the income compensation of the Western District.

During the trial of the case, the Western District Company proposed that Sun Xianfeng had not had disciplinary actions such as work uniforms, check -in, scolding supervisors, and failing to submit business funds in accordance with the regulations, and seriously violated the regulations of the employer in accordance with the company's rules and regulations; From October 20th, Sun Xianfeng was absent from work for many days without performing leave procedures and not approved. From October 20, 2017, he has terminated the labor relationship with Sun Xianfeng, which is in line with legal regulations.

【Judgment results】

The People's Court of Guannan County, Jiangsu Province on November 15, 2018 (2018) Su 0724 Civil Judgment No. 2732: 1. The defendant's Western District Company will pay the plaintiff Sun Xianfeng's economic compensation within ten days from the date of this judgment 18989.46 Yuan. 2. Rejected the plaintiff Sun Xianfeng's other litigation requests. Western companies did not accept it and appealed. The Lianyungang Intermediate People's Court of Jiangsu Province made a civil judgment on April 22, 2019 (2019) Su 07 Public 658: Reject the appeal and maintain the original judgment.

【Guiding significance】

In this case, when the people's court judges the legality of the employer's unilateral termination of the labor contract, it shall take the content of the content of the termination notice issued by the employer to the worker; The reason for the reason for the case during the trial of the case, the people's court did not support it. In this case, the judgment criteria of the employer's unilateral relief of the labor contract behavior will help the employer to abide by the principles of honesty and facilities, which is conducive to protecting the legitimate rights and interests of workers, and has positive significance for building a harmonious labor relationship.

Guidance Case No. 181:

Zheng Mou sued Honeywell Automation Control (China) Co., Ltd. labor contract dispute case

【Basic Case】

Zheng joined Honeywell Automation (China) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Honeywell) in July 2012 as a channel sales manager. Honeywell has established sexual harassment training mechanisms with workplace, and Zheng has received relevant training. Honeywell's "Business Code of Business" stipulates that managers and supervisors "should ensure that their subordinates can speak smoothly and do not need to worry about being retaliated, all concerns or problems can be professional and timely resolved", and no retaliation behavior is allowed. The 2017 "Employee Manual" stipulates that the behavior of performing sexual harassment for others, violating the company's "Business Conduct", and a false statement in the company's internal survey are all disciplinary behaviors that will cause immediately dismissal. The above rules and regulations were discussed by the company's union communication meeting before implementation.

The labor contract signed by Zheng Mou and Honeywell stipulated that Zheng Mou confirmed and agreed to the company's existing rules and regulations such as the company's existing "Employee Manual" and "Business Conduct" as part of this contract. After the "Employee Manual" was revised, Zheng signed a confirmation letter again, saying that he had read, understood, and was willing to accept the 2017 version of "Employee Manual". He was willing to abide by the company's policy as a prerequisite for working in Honeywell. On August 30, 2018, Zheng was a bit rigid because he believed that the relationship between Ren Ren and Zheng Mou (married) (married) was a bit rigid. Zheng mentioned yesterday that Deng had said a word to Renmou, and Ren did not answer, and he also ran to Ren Somewhere to help the circle. Renmou mentioned that when he first joined the job, he showed Zheng Mou's sexual harassment WeChat records sent by the indirect superiors Deng. At the time, Zheng answered "I just don't want to mix this matter" "I don't want to answer you anymore in the future. "I feel a little strange, I dare not ask." During the conversation, Renmou emphasized that Deng was sexually harassing him. Deng asked to develop a relationship with him and continued to harass after his rejection. Knock it. Zheng said, "If you work like this, make me sad" "The more you are, the more he thinks he wants to take you", "He is so direct, if I am, get close to you, touch it, and look at it. Then chat. "

Later, in November 2018, Zheng proposed to the Personnel Department of Honeywell's personnel to terminate the labor contract with Renwell, but failed to explain the reasonable basis for the lifting of Renmou's labor contract. For this reason, the Ministry of Personnel finds Renmou to understand the situation. Ren Mou informed the Personnel Department that he was harassed by Deng, an indirect superior, and Zheng intentionally or unintentionally matched him and Deng, and was attacked by refusing harassment. Honeywell launched an investigation for this.

On January 15, 2019, Honeywell investigated Zheng and produced an investigation transcript. Zheng did not sign the underwriting transcript, but made many modifications to the company's inquiries recorded by the transcript. Zheng Mou did not modify the "None" of the "None" of the "None" of the "None" of the "None" recorded in the investigation transcript that there were some inappropriate words and the question of sexual harassment.

On January 31, 2019, Honeywell issued the "Unilateral Lift Letter", with Zheng's duties of not fulfilling his manager. After the subordinates reported that they were indirectly harassed, they did not take any measures. The subordinates conducted a blow retaliation, and made a false statement on the fact that the above facts were made on the facts of the investigation, and Zheng Mou terminated the labor contract with Zheng.

On July 22, 2019, Zheng applied for arbitration with the Shanghai Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission, asking Honeywell to pay the illegal lift of the labor contract compensation of 36,8130 yuan. The request was not supported by the arbitration. Zheng did not accept it and complained to the People's Court of Pudong New District, Shanghai.

【Judgment results】

The People's Court of Pudong New District in Shanghai issued a civil judgment on November 30, 2020 (2020) Shanghai 0115 Minchu No. 10454: rejected Zheng's claim. Zheng did not accept the judgment of the first instance and filed an appeal. The Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court made on April 22, 2021 (2021) Shanghai 01 Civil Judgment No. 2032: The appeal was rejected and the original sentence was maintained.

【Guiding significance】

This case clarifies that the managers of the employer have not taken reasonable measures on the complaints of sexual harassment employees, or there are vertical harassment behaviors, interference to investigate sexual harassment, etc. If the labor contract and the manager claims to lift the labor contract illegal, the people's court will not support it. After the implementation of the Civil Code, the employer rationally builds a sexual harassment prevention and disposal mechanism, effectively enhances the awareness of the entire staff, and effectively prevents the sexual harassment behavior of the workplace. It has certain demonstration and guiding significance.

Guidance Case No. 182:

Peng Yuxiang sued Nanjing Urban Construction and Development (Group) Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. to pursue labor remuneration disputes

【Basic Case】

Nanjing Urban Construction and Development (Group) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Chengkai Company) formulated the "Interim Measures for the Imported Projects on Investment Projects" in August 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the "Reward Measures") For commercial housing projects, the city -opening company will comprehensively consider comprehensive factors such as project scale and an annualized average profit value merger form, and use the expected profit or income of the project as the reward base, and determine the total reward in accordance with 0.1%-0.5%. The reward shall be applied by the specific rewards of various departments or other personnel by the investment and development department. In February 2017, Peng Yuxiang joined the city to act as the manager of the investment and development department. In June 2017, the Investment and Development Department formed the "Minutes of the Conference" to determine that the internal reward distribution plan was 75%of the general manager's account of the general manager's bonus, and the remaining project participants accounted for 25%of the department's bonus.

During Peng Yuxiang's duties, his dominant investment and development department successfully introduced the sixth project of Wuxi Hongmei Xintiandi, Yangzhou GZ051 plot, Rugao Yerry Town, Xuzhou Jiaozhuang, Gaoyou Hongji Wanhe City, and Xuzhou Pengcheng Machinery. The investment and development department of the sixth project has submitted six reward applications to the city's company.

Until Peng Yuxiang's departure from the city opened, the city's company did not issue the above rewards. After the labor arbitration procedure, Peng Yuxiang appealed to the court within the statutory period and asked the city to open a company to pay a reward of 1689,083 yuan. During the trial of the case, the city -opening company's recognition of the sixth project was initially met the prize conditions stipulated in the "Reward Measures". The project's reward application was not approved, and Peng Yuxiang claimed that Peng Yuxiang's request for his payment of bonuses could not be established. Regarding the inquiry of the court's "Peng Yuxiang's current stage on the project on the above project, whether the city opening company launch the audit process", the city opening company clearly refused and stated that the approval procedure of the six projects will not be launched since then. In addition, Chengkai Company also advocated that Peng Yuxiang had serious negligence in the Wuxi Hongmei Xintiandi Project and Rugao York Town Project. There was a serious loss in the second project. However, no sufficient evidence was submitted to prove.

【Judgment results】

Nanjing Qinhuai District People's Court issued a civil judgment on September 11, 2018 (2018) Soviet 0104 Minchu 6032: Rejected Peng Yuxiang's lawsuit. Peng Yuxiang was dissatisfied and appealed. The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court of Jiangsu Province issued a civil judgment on January 3, 2020 (2018) Su 01 Public 10066 Civil Judgment: 1. Civil judgment of the Nanjing Qinhuai District People's Court (2018) Su 0104 Minchu 6032; Second, The City Kai Company paid Peng Yuxiang award 1259564.4 yuan within 15 days from the date of effectiveness of this judgment.

【Guiding significance】

This case clarifies that employers stipulate that workers can receive bonuses after completing a certain performance, and apply for bonuses for eligible workers who apply for bonuses. The employer refuses to perform the approval obligations without justified reasons. If the worker claims to the people's courts, the people's court shall be supported if the employer shall issue bonuses in accordance with regulations. This case has a positive effect on regulating the autonomy of employer employment and guiding employers in the process of labor contract performance, and establishing a harmonious, stable, and benign interaction labor relationship.

In addition, the guidance case No. 183, No. 184, and 185 specifies that although the regulations of the employer stipulate that the workers who leave before the year -end award will not be able to enjoy the year -end award, but the termination of the labor contract is unilaterally negligent or actively resigned from the labor contract or the active resignation house. As a result, when the worker meets the annual year -end award distribution standard, if the worker advocates that the employer pays the year -end award, the people's court shall support it. This case has guiding significance for the people's court's trial of the year -end awards, preventing employers from infringing the legitimate rights and interests of workers by the name of the rules and regulations; If the period of arbitration application for disputes and litigation shall not be included in the period of the competition restrictions, it belongs to the "employer to exempt its legal responsibilities and eliminate the right of workers" stipulated in Article 26 of the Labor Contract Law. The situation should be identified as invalid; when the employer recruits personnel, the factors that are not necessary to connect with the "internal requirements of the work" based on the "internal requirements of the work" shall be treated with a difference. Legal responsibility. (Reporter Li Haikai)

(This article published on July 12, 2022 China Business Daily Rule of Law Weekly 3)

- END -