Labor Disputes Arising From Relocation Of Enterprises

In December 19, 2014, the labor dispute arbitration tribunal in Zhuzhou ended on trial for 3 days. A private enterprise in Zhuzhou paid 68 employees' statutory holidays, overtime wages and unpaid annual leave payments according to law, totaling 588112 yuan.

"The decision of the court of arbitration is basically in line with the actual situation, but we have different views on the number of years of annual leave pay and the way to identify attendance."

Ceng Huirong, a lawyer for legal aid of 68 employees and lawyer of Zhuzhou's law firm, refused to accept the arbitration result and filed a lawsuit against Shi Feng district court.

In July 2014, a private enterprise in Zhuzhou officially launched the production line of three new production lines in Liling, Zhuzhou. The factory area in Zhuzhou was closed down, and 68 workers such as Wujiang stopped working contracts with the enterprises because they were unwilling to work in Liling.

68 employees demand payment from enterprises.

The employer should give notice one month in advance when he proposes to terminate the labor contract or terminate the labor contract. If the employer fails to give notice in advance of the month's notice, he will be entitled to one month's wages instead of it and the economic compensation.

The arbitral tribunal will not support this requirement.

Zeng Wen, the chief arbitrator of the Zhuzhou Federation of trade unions, is very concerned about the case. He told reporters that the private enterprise responded to the government's call to cooperate with the government in implementing the central government's decision on pollution control and relocated the enterprises.

In April 29, 2014, the company also held a staff representative conference, voted to adopt the "Zhuzhou company's overall relocation of Liling staff plan", and published in the main media of Zhuzhou, "the enterprise did not violate the relevant provisions of the" labor law ".

"On this issue, I agree with the arbitral tribunal's decision."

Ceng Huirong saw a piece of evidence provided by the enterprise, that is, the enterprise's 2 months ahead of time to the employee's independent choice to pay attention to the notice, the notice clearly informed, choose not to work in Liling workers will terminate the labor contract.

Ceng Huirong explained that, according to the fortieth article of the labor contract law, the private enterprise was totally moved because of the pollution problem, and the objective situation based on the conclusion of the labor contract changed significantly, resulting in the labor contract could not be fulfilled. After the employer and the laborer failed to negotiate an agreement on changing the contents of the labor contract, the rescission of the labor contract with the workers was lawful.

"The identification of attendance has always been the focus of controversy."

Ceng Huirong took out the electronic attendance table of 68 employees as evidence, and the private enterprise took out the electronic attendance table and the paper attendance table from July 2012 to June 2014.

"The emergence of two kinds of evidence has led to the fact that overtime work is rather difficult. What kind of time table is the basis for calculating overtime pay?" in the face of two kinds of evidence, arbitrator Zeng Wen also felt a headache.

Finally, the arbitral tribunal took the paper attendance table as the main part, combined with the consistent parts of the electronic attendance table, and calculated the compensation for the overtime payment of 68 employees from July 2012 to June 2014.

"The arbitral tribunal maintains that the paper attendance table is estimated in two ways."

According to Zeng Wen analysis, the paper attendance sheet has the signature and seal of the special person, which is more reasonable than the electronic attendance table, and the arbitration tribunal is more likely to accept it.

Electronic attendance is more often used by enterprises to standardize the management of employees' entry and exit orders. In addition, 68 employees did not provide attendance records before July 2012, so the arbitration tribunal decided to calculate overtime wages on the basis of paper attendance tables.

"I think this is unreasonable."

Ceng Huirong said, paper attendance table is not complete, can not fully and objectively reflect the overtime work of employees, and electronic attendance is an effective evidence for workers to enter factories. The staff electronic attendance table "test" is the situation of workers' commuting. If we calculate according to the paper attendance table, the overtime work of the 68 workers can not be fully reflected.

"Overtime work should be done by the employer. The paper can not be used because of the incomplete electronic attendance record."

Ceng Huirong said he will strive to maintain the rights and interests of the 68 employees in the first instance.