Law Popularization: Prohibiting Employees From Buying A Certain Type Of Mobile Phone Is Really Too Broad.

In the name of "saving", limiting employees' purchase of a mobile phone, infringing on consumers' right to choose, also violating labor law and labor contract law. Netizens posted that the new Jiuzhou gynecology hospital in Fuling, Chongqing, issued a notice to seal the official seal of the hospital, prohibiting employees from buying a brand phone.

It is also a ban on the purchase of a newly listed American mobile phone by employees. However, the reason why the hospital is prohibited from buying is not the "patriotism" and "boycott of foreign goods" claimed by some enterprises, but rather "advocacy of thrift and frugality and the elimination of extravagance and waste". It stipulates that if the buyer insists on the violation of this notice, he will abolish his annual qualification and the hospital will be discouraged from the purchaser beyond the ability.

Whenever I see such news, I first think of a company. Marketing means This year, as long as we can increase exposure and attract eyeballs, various marketing tools will continue to break through the lower limit. But seriously looking at the documents of this hospital, I dare not believe that it is marketing. Marketing is to promote publicity to oneself. This stipulation will be criticized by public opinion because it is not only unreasonable but also illegal.

First, the hospital is suspected of violating consumer choice.

Moreover, people are rational economic people, which determines that employees spend their hard-earned money, according to their own interests and special requirements, and in the scope of their own can be carried out. Reasonable consumption It is the result of comparison, identification and selection in a variety of alternative mobile phones. Theoretically, there is no waste in personal consumption. There is a very reasonable calculation behind the seemingly wasteful behavior.

In the name of "saving", it is not lawful to restrict consumers' right to choose independently. consumes'interests The protection law also goes against the "law against unfair competition".

Secondly, because employees broke through the prohibition order of hospitals, it is not reasonable to cancel their annual qualification. Whether the employee has qualification or not, mainly refers to his work attitude and performance, but not his basic food and clothing. If he buys a mobile phone to discourage employees, violates the relevant provisions of the labor law and the labor contract law, the employer can not terminate the employee's labor contract at will.

In other words, if an employee is buying something beyond his ability, he must think it is very important to him. Even if he has wasted a lot of money, he will waste his money and get his satisfaction. What is he doing? Is he disguised himself as a policeman on the Pacific?

Seeing that companies often prohibit employees from buying a certain type of mobile phone, regardless of the purpose behind them, I think we should give the company a little bit of legal color to see that things that ignore employees' rights and interests can not be changed constantly.