Is it valid for the year -end prize to leave before the year -end prize?

Referee points

If the workers who pre -employed by the year -end prize are advocating for the employer to pay the year -end award, the people's court shall comprehensively consider the reasons, departure time, work performance, and contribution of the unit in combination with the employee. The rules and 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 caused by the unilateral negligence or active resignation of the workers, and the workers have completed their annual work tasks. The work performance and performance of the person do not meet the annual year -end award distribution standards. If the workers who leave the employment before the year -end award issued the employer should pay the year -end award, the people's court shall support it.

Related Laws: Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law of the People's Communist Republic of China

Basic case

From January 2011 to the Sino -US United Thai Metropolitan Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Metropolitan Association), the last labor contract performance date signed between the two parties was from July 1, 2015 to 6, 2017 On the 30th, Fang Yan was agreed to serve as a senior manager of the Ministry of Strategy. In October 2017, the Metropolitan Company adjusted its organizational structure and decided to revoke the Ministry of Strategy. The positions held by Fang Yan were canceled. The two sides started negotiation for nearly two months on changing the labor contract and other matters. On December 29, the Metropolitan Company changed major changes in objective situations, and the two parties failed to reach an agreement on the negotiation of the labor contract, and issued the "Notice of Labor Contract to Lift the Labor Contract" to Fang Yan. Fang Yan refused to accept the decision. After the labor arbitration procedure, the prosecution requested to restore the labor relationship with the metropolitan company and asked for the wage difference between the labor contract from August to December 2017 and the 2017 bonus. The Metropolitan Company's "Employee Manual" stipulates that the year -end bonus is calculated according to the company's performance and employee performance according to the company's policies. The premise is that the employee has joined the employee before October 1 that year. enjoy. According to investigations, the Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Award Award will be issued around March of the following year.

Referee result

The Huangpu District People's Court of Shanghai issued a civil judgment on October 29, 2018 (2018) Shanghai 0101 China Early Chuan 10726:

I. Metropolitan company pays the plaintiff Fang Yan from the date of effectiveness from the date of effectiveness of the judgment.

2. Fang Yan's other litigation requests are not supported. Fang Yan was dissatisfied and appealed to Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court.

The Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court made on March 4, 2019 (2018) Shanghai 02 Public 11292 Civil Judgment:

1. Maintain the first item of the Civil Judgment of Huangpu District People's Court of Shanghai (2018) Shanghai 0101 No. 10726;

2. Revisit the second item of the Civil Judgment of the People's Court of Huangpu District (2018) Shanghai 0101 No. 10726 in Shanghai;

3. Metropolitan company pays the appellant Fang Yan's 2017 annual year -end award tax of 13,8600 yuan within 7 days from the date of effectiveness;

Fourth, Fang Yan's other requests are not supported.

Referee

The court's effective referee believes that the focus of the controversy in this case is that the employer has changed major changes in the termination of the labor contract based on the objective situation, resulting in whether the worker can obtain the corresponding year -end award when the workers do not meet the requirements of the year -end award issuance stipulated by the employee manual.

In this regard, the court of first instance believes that the Metropolitan company's "Employee Manual" clearly stipulates the bonus issuance situation. Fang Yan left the company before the Metropolitan company issued the 2017 bonus and did not meet the bonus issuance. The request is not supported.

After trial, the court of second instance believed that the current laws and regulations did not force the annual final award to be issued. The employer has the right to independently determine whether the bonus is issued, the issuance conditions and the issuance standards are based on the operating conditions of the unit, the performance of the employee's performance, etc. However, the distribution rules formulated by the employer should still follow the principle of fairness and reasonableness. Whether the workers who have left before the year -end award can receive the year -end award, the reasons, time, work performance, and contribution to the unit should be combined with the employee's departure. Comprehensive consideration of factors. In this case, Metropolitan Company adjusted its organizational structure, and the two parties failed to achieve an agreement on the change of labor contracts, resulting in the termination of the labor contract. Fang Yan worked at the Metropolitan company until December 29, 2017, and the two days later, showing that Fang Yan had worked for a year in the Metropolitan Company in 2017; In the case of performance and other aspects, it can be determined that Fang Yan has paid a whole year of labor and fulfilling his duties for the whole year, and has made his due contribution to the Metropolitan Company. Based on the above reasons, Metropolitan Company's claim that Fang Yan had left before the year -end prize issuance month lacks rationality. Therefore, the annual award of the Metropolitan Metropolitan Company should be supported by the Metropolitan Metropolitan Company.

Supreme Council Guidance Case No. 183: Fang Yan complained about the labor contract dispute of China United Thai Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Society

(Effective referee judges: Guo Zhenghai, Xie Yalin, Yi Su Su)

Source: Zifu said labor law, Shandong Gao Law

- END -