Can Fingerprint Attendance Records Be Accepted?

Lao Li worked in the company for a long time. He thought he was an old employee. He often made a lot of mistakes. In the previous stage, the company's human resources department bought a new fingerprint attendance machine and revised the original attendance system. The company sends the revised attendance system to each employee's e-mail address for your advice. After 10 days of consultation, there was no objection from the staff, and the new attendance system began to be formally implemented. 3 months later, Lao Li received the notice of the company to terminate the labor contract because the old Li was late 25 times in the 3 months, and the total absenteeism was 5 days, which had seriously violated the attendance system and reached the company's condition of rescission of the labor contract. Lao Li naturally refused to accept that the company was unlawful. Labor contract Therefore, the labor dispute arbitration is proposed, which requires the company to pay the compensation for breaking the labor contract illegally. In the court hearing, in order to confirm the basis of the company's lifting, the company provided Lao Li's fingerprint attendance record, that is, the attendance record in the computer. But Lao Li believes that the attendance evidence is made by the company unilaterally, and the data in the computer can be modified. The authenticity of the attendance records is not confirmed.

As an employer, he should bear the burden of proof for Li's attendance. In this case, the fingerprint attendance records provided by the company are printed paper documents, and objectively exist the possibility of modification, because Li does not recognize the evidence, and the labor dispute arbitration committee does not accept the evidence. The company failed to provide effective evidence to prove that Lee's attendance should bear the legal consequences of adverse evidence. Finally, the company decided to pay compensation for illegal labor contracts.

The newly revised "January 1, 2013" Civil law "Article sixty-third provides that evidence includes statements, documentary evidence, material evidence, audio-visual materials, electronic data, testimony of witnesses, appraisal opinions and inquest records. Among them, electronic data alone has become a type of evidence. In addition to previous e-mail, SMS and facsimile, QQ chat records, micro-blog's private letters and so on can also be presented as court testimony. In February 4, 2015, a judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme People's court showed that online chatting records, blogs, microblogs, cell phone messages, electronic signatures, domain names and other information stored or stored in electronic media can be regarded as evidence in civil cases.

As evidence, it should conform to the "three nature" of evidence, that is objectivity, relevance and legality. The objectivity of evidence, also known as truthfulness, refers to the fact that litigation evidence is an objective fact and is not spanferred by human will. The relevance of evidence, also known as relevance, refers to the fact that there is some objective connection between the fact of evidence and the facts of the case, so that the evidence can prove the facts of the case. The fact that evidence has the power of proof and the power of proof for the facts of a case depends on whether the evidence itself is closely related to the facts of the case and how close it is. Finally, the legality of evidence means that evidence must have a statutory form, a statutory collection procedure, a legitimate source, a legal procedure, and a review and application.

Similarly, electronic evidence, as a form of evidence, should also be examined from three aspects. Among them, the objectivity of electronic evidence, that is, authenticity, is the key. although Electronic evidence It has the characteristics of high technology, diversity, objectivity and so on, but it is also easy to modify. This characteristic determines that electronic evidence has special requirements in many aspects, such as the way of obtaining evidence, the process of obtaining evidence, and the preservation of evidence. Otherwise, the power of proof or even the power of evidence of electronic evidence will be affected. In the above cases, Lao Li believes that the fingerprint attendance records provided by the company can be modified without confirmation. Obviously, the focus of the two sides revolves around the objectivity of the electronic evidence, that is, authenticity. Judging from the current judicial practice of labor dispute cases, judging the objectivity (authenticity) of electronic evidence is mainly through several ways: first, the electronic evidence recognized by both parties is generally accepted. Secondly, it is proved that the qualified witness is the real electronic evidence through the form of a recognizance, that is, the guarantee of the authenticity of the electronic evidence is generally accepted by the professional and technical personnel. Third, the truthfulness of electronic evidence should be recognized in a presumptive way. The last one is to identify the unmodified electronic evidence by a qualified expert, which is generally accepted. It can be seen that Lao Li does not recognize the authenticity of electronic attendance, and the company should prove its authenticity through the above way, otherwise it should bear the negative consequences.

In judicial practice, when the electronic attendance record is used as electronic evidence, the requirement for the ability to provide evidence for the employer will be very high: on the one hand, the appraisal conclusion should be issued by the appraisal institution with judicial expertise, that is, the electronic attendance machine used by the unit, no one can modify the data. On the other hand, the notary office should make a notarization on the spot print situation of the electronic attendance data printed from the attendance machine. Only when the two are combined can the electronic attendance data be accepted. Electronic attendance is no longer a matter of identification, notarization, or expert assistance. If the employing unit of the electronic attendance method can prevent and control things, such as regularly printing out the abnormal attendance records, signing the employees' confirmation, etc., it will avoid the confusion of disputes. And because of the employee's own confirmation, the general judicial practice will be accepted.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats net report.