How To Determine The Legal Consequences Of Leaving Job?

Judge: I am a staff member of an industrial park.

Last week, I met a strange thing.

Lao Li, a factory worker in the park, blocked the door of the factory at work time and refused to let the vehicle in and out, and asked the company to give a statement about the dismissal.

The staff of our park just inspected there. In order not to affect the production order of the whole park, they took Lao Li to the office of the park, and informed the relevant personnel of the company to come to the conference to resolve the matter.

According to Lao Li, two weeks ago, the leader talked with him, saying that the factory's benefit was not good, and the new order was gone, so it was necessary to lay off staff for a month.

Because a factory where friends worked was also recruiting nearby, Lao Li did not raise objections and handed over the rest of his work to the rest of his life.

Two days ago, he went to the factory to do the formalities.

Even the compensation does not agree with him.

Lao li felt he had been cheated, so he made trouble at the door of the unit.

Now that the unit insists on not firing Lao Li, it considers it to be an automatic resignation.

Lao Li insisted on the illegal dismissal of the unit and demanded the other party to pay the compensation for breaking the contract illegally.

Because the public says that the public is reasonable and the woman is reasonable. We can not tell who is right.

Some people think that the unit should pay the compensation for breaking the labor contract illegally. Some people say that as long as the economic compensation can be paid, some people say Lao Li has no evidence and should adopt the argument of the unit, which is regarded as Lao Li's automatic resignation.

Under such circumstances, how should we decide which legal consequences should be borne by?

China's labor law has strict restrictions on the employer's unilateral rescission of labor contracts, and clearly stipulates that the employer decides to terminate the labor contract. The employer should bear full burden of proof on the legality of the rescission of the labor contract.

If the employer illegally terminates the labor contract, the laborer may claim a resumption of the labor relationship. If the worker does not ask for the resumption of the labor relationship or the labor relation is resumed, it is impossible to resume labor relations, but the employer shall pay the worker's compensation for the illegal rescission of the labor contract, which is two times the economic compensation.

Due to relevant judicial interpretation provisions

The decision to terminate the labor contract shall be borne by the employer in the burden of proof on the dismissal legality. Therefore, the worker's claim for termination of the labor contract shall first be confirmed by the dismissal of the employer.

In real life, some employers often choose alternative means such as persuaded speech, forced speech or disengagement, so as to avoid the risk of illegal release.

In case of dispute, the employer's defenses are three, one is automatic resignation, the two is not relieved, laborers absenteeism; three, consensus is lifted.

If the unit adopts the way of oral notification, it is often difficult for others to judge whether the employer has exercised the understanding of the employment right. Some workers can not defend their legitimate rights and interests because there is no evidence.

In this regard, we believe that in order to avoid the occurrence of the above situation, workers should not leave or sign a contradiction with the facts when they encounter relevant circumstances.

For those who are not willing to quit, attention should be paid to retaining relevant evidence, such as requiring the unit to issue a written decision to terminate the contract, and invite trade union organizations and dispute mediation agencies to intervene as collateral witnesses, so as to effectively protect their rights.

The problems you are facing now are not difficult to find.

For Lao Li and his company's claims, you can use logical reasoning and daily life experience to judge the size of the proof of their respective evidence.

Now the unit said Lao Li left his office, but he did not have the resignation report submitted by Lao Li. It can be confirmed that if Lao Li is indeed an annual leave, then the unit's so-called absenteeism is also unfounded.

While Lao Li stated that the company was not enough to lay off the job, its proposition was that it could make a comprehensive judgement by understanding the company's related staff turnover and the investigation of other employees.

If there is a fact of layoffs in the company, from the daily experience and logical judgement, Lao Li mentioned that the company's dismissal is more credible.

If the judgment is established, according to Lao Li's statement, the contract was also accepted by the unit at that time, and the contract should be terminated by consensus.

Lao Li now claims that the company has paid insufficient compensation for its illegal rescission of the labor contract.

I would like to ask the relevant personnel and check the corresponding evidence, the truth will come out.

And the handling according to the above principles will definitely reflect fairness and justice.

I hope these comments will help you to mediate this dispute.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.