Wages Below The Minimum Standards Can Be Reported.

Recently, Ms. Wang (Jiangxi Jiujiang) called the newspaper hotline 8530000. She said she worked in Duchang County Unicom's channel management, with a monthly salary of only about 700 yuan.

Reporters learned that

The minimum wage standards for the four categories of provinces in the province have been adjusted, including the lowest in Duchang County of Jiujiang.

It is adjusted from 1060 yuan per month to 1180 yuan per month.

What channels should Ms. Wang take to protect her rights?

It may report to the labor supervision department or apply for arbitration to the labor arbitration commission. If labor arbitration fails to accept the case, it may sue the court.

Zhang lawyer, a law firm in Jiangxi, said that according to the labor contract law, if the employer has paid a deduction or no reason for arrears of wages, refused to pay wages for workers to extend their working hours, and paid wages for workers below the local minimum wage standard, the labor administrative department shall order the laborers to pay wages and financial compensation for workers who have not paid the laborers compensation in accordance with the provisions of this law after the dissolution of the labor contract, and may also be ordered to pay compensation.

Related links:

When he stopped working for 30 years, he was prepared to handle the retirement formalities. He was told that the original unit did not give him the employment procedures.

Huang XXX and the company repeatedly failed to deal with the company, then put the company into the court.

After the trial of the people's Court of Shanwei City, the first trial confirmed that there was a factual labor relationship between the plaintiff Huang and the defendant.

The defendant refused to accept the first instance judgment and appealed to the intermediate people's Court of Shanwei.

Recently, the court made a two adjudication decision, dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

Huang went to work in Haifeng County subsidiary company in 1981 and worked in Shanwei X. comprehensive processing plant, and began to suspend salary in 1984.

In 1988, the factory was segmented from the Haifeng supply and marketing company, and the Shanwei city * * Industrial and Trading Company was established.

Since then, the company did not notify Huang Mou to work, Huang did not go to the company to work.

In June 2013, Huang asked the company to reissue employment procedures and related welfare benefits and was refused by the company.

In October 9, 2014, Huang submitted an arbitration to the city labor and personnel dispute arbitration committee.

In October 15th of the same year, the Urban Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission issued a notice of inadmissibility on the ground that "the arbitration request exceeds the time limit for arbitration".

In October 30, 2014, Huang went to the court of Shanwei city x x Industrial and Trading Company and asked the court to confirm that there was a labor relationship between them, and the company reissued the relevant employment procedures, social security or one-time compensation for 400 thousand yuan, and confirmed that it enjoyed the same housing treatment as the staff participating in the same period, and the company assigned him a house.

The court of first instance concluded that the plaintiff, Huang Moumou, worked in the Shanwei XX comprehensive processing plant from 1981 to the end of 1987, and was a temporary worker in the processing plant.

Since 1984, the plaintiff has not paid his salary, and the fact has been proved by the proof of the Haifeng county supply and marketing cooperative and the wage table of the defendant company and the payroll of the employee.

After the establishment of the Shanwei urban area * Industrial and Trading Company, the plaintiff did not notify the plaintiff to go through the relevant employment procedures, terminate or terminate the labor relationship, and the plaintiff did not go to the company to work. It should be regarded as the original labor relationship between the defendant and the defendant. The certificate issued by the defendant company in June 10, 2013 also admitted that the plaintiff had suspended his salary from 1984.

Although in the court trial, the defendant claimed that the certificate was the personal act of Wang Mou, the former deputy manager of the company, and had nothing to do with the defendant company, but the certificate was stamped with the seal of the defendant company, which could be regarded as a company's behavior.

Therefore, the plaintiff's request to confirm his request for a labor relationship with the defendant was sufficient and supported.

Because the defendant has no independent personnel power, the plaintiff requests the defendant to reissue the relevant employment procedures, and the defendant is unable to perform, so the request does not conform to the objective reality and does not support it.

The plaintiff's other claims are not within the scope of labor disputes accepted by the court, and shall be dismissed.

The judgment confirmed that there was a factual labor relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, and dismissed the plaintiff's other claims.

After hearing the trial, the court of second instance upheld the verdict of the court of first instance and expounded the limitation of action in the case.

The court of second instance held that when Huang went to a supply and marketing company in June 2013, he was informed that the company did not process the employment procedures for him until he knew that his rights had been infringed, and the time limit for arbitration began to be calculated.

Because the plaintiff asked to deal with the complaints of the Shanwei Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection in May 7, 2014, the arbitration period was interrupted, and Huang Mou applied for arbitration in October 9, 2014, which would not exceed the limitation period of arbitration.

The Arbitration Commission made an arbitration notice in October 15, 2014, and the plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the court on October 2014 30, so it will not exceed the statutory period.

As a means of social relief, law naturally bears the responsibility of protecting the rights of the obligee, but "the law does not protect the sleeper of rights".

In this case, both the defendant and the defendant had the right to exercise their rights, so there was such a labor relationship lawsuit.

If the plaintiff can pay attention to the movement of his unit and pay attention to his rights early, he will not be able to get to the retirement age but not to retire.

Although the defendant did not want to acknowledge the labor relationship with the plaintiff, in the past 30 years, he neither relieved the labor relations nor asked the defendant to go to work.

Therefore, we should give more warning to the "right sleeper", and we should advocate personal legal rights in time to reduce unnecessary disputes.