Be Alert To The Condition Of Avoiding Annual Leave With Employment

A few days ago, the opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on building harmonious labor relations were officially released. After careful reading of the "opinion", we will find that there are specific opinions on how to implement paid vacation.

At the same time, the opinion also stipulates that the establishment of harmonious labor relations should be included in the assessment index of local governments.

Today, the welfare of workers is more secure.

This policy consultation desk will invite relevant lawyers and experts to read a series of explanations about the employees' sabbatical.

The regulations on paid annual leave for employees clearly stipulate: "the cumulative employment of employees has been less than 10 years for 1 years, and the annual leave is 5 days; the annual leave of 10 years has already been 10 years for less than 20 years; the annual leave of 15 years has been 20 years.

In practice, some employers conclude labor contracts with laborers intermittently, and then avoid the statutory annual leave conditions during the waiting period between several labor contracts.

One phenomenon is that workers are waiting time every year, and there is no continuous work for 12 months.

As a vacation, I think

You should not enjoy paid annual leave.

This policy advisory desk prompts that we should distinguish between waiting for post and

During the annual vacation with paid employees, the workers enjoy normal wages, while the workers can only enjoy basic living expenses when they are on duty, so they can not be confused.

The claim that the deadline for waiting for a job to meet the deadline is not valid.

When this happens, workers should try to collect relevant evidence of continuous working hours, such as attendance records, work papers, payroll records and other materials, so as to win the initiative in the process of proof and complaints, and maintain their own paid vacation rights and interests.

Related links:

Worried about employment discrimination, Ms. Wang, a married and uneducated woman, lied about her education when she was applying for a job.

After being hired, the training center found that Miss Wang dismissed her personal data at first.

Ms. Wang believes that the practice of training centers is discriminatory against employment and violates the provisions of the law.

Recently, the people's Court of Huangpu District, Shanghai, made a judgment on the labor contract dispute, and ordered the training center to resume the labor contract relationship with Ms. Wang.

In September 2012, Ms. Wang applied for a IELTS English teacher at a training center.

Due to the lack of childbirth after marriage, Ms. Wang was worried that the training center would treat the childless women differently when hiring, so when completing the job registration form, they would fill in the column of marriage and childbirth status to be married and educated and falsely report their children's information.

After several rounds of interviews, Ms. Wang successfully entered the training center and signed a two-year labor contract.

Since then, Ms. Wang has been doing well in her work.

Until the 2 menstrual period last year, the hospital was diagnosed with pregnancy, and Ms. Wang informed the training center of the pregnancy.

Unexpectedly, when the Training Center learned about the situation, she released her labor contract on the grounds of Ms. Wang's false personal information.

Ms. Wang believes that its practice is illegal to terminate the labor contract.

To this end, Ms. Wang will take the training center to court.

In the trial, the training center argued that Ms. Wang had completed and signed a series of documents when she entered the office, which required staff to provide real information.

According to the labor contract signed by both parties and the system of rewards and punishments and penalties, employees who provide false information can be dismissed.

It is not improper for the company to terminate the labor contract with Ms. Wang according to the rules and regulations.

The training center also emphasized whether fertility is not related to the position of Ms. Wang, but the issue of honesty is directly related to the position.

After hearing the case, Ms. Wang believed that Ms. Wang did not commit fraud because she worried about discrimination in employment, and the training center made a false statement on the birth status of Ms. Wang when she signed a labor contract, filled out a job application form and a basic employee registration form.

Ms. Wang is now in production leave, and the petition for restoring labor relations with the training center should be supported.

The labor contract law stipulates the truthfully informing obligation of employers and workers.

So, does the fertility status belong to the scope of the workers' duty of disclosure? What kind of legal consequences will the workers do not truthfully inform? For this reason, Xu Hui, the judge of the case, made the following analysis:

First, the employee's obligation to inform is "a basic situation directly related to the labor contract", that is, a work history that has substantive meaning with the performance of the labor contract, usually including personal information of the worker, which can reflect the working ability of the workers to a certain extent, the degree of technical proficiency, the letter of recommendation from the original unit, the qualification certificate or health information that must be provided for the special post.

Marriage and fertility are usually not related to the performance of labor contracts.

Secondly, false statements in the process of signing labor contracts constitute fraud, which is the basis for employing units to exercise the right of dismissal.

Among them, fraud means that one party intentionally tells the other person the false situation, or intentionally conceals the real situation, and induces the other party to make a wrong intention.

However, in this case, the training center has made it clear that Ms. Wang is not related to whether she is pregnant or not. The training center does not believe in the birth of the false statement and signs labor contracts with her. Ms. Wang's practice should not be identified as fraud. The training center will not have the right to terminate the labor contract accordingly.