As attendance and punching methods become more and more diverse,
All kinds of fraud also followed.
recently
Yuelu District People's Court of Changsha City
One such labor dispute case was announced
To express the existence of a certain cause
Repeatedly entrusting someone to clock in or checking in on behalf of others, making false attendance reports, etc.
Fired from the company
Yu sued the company to court
Request financial compensation for illegal termination of contract
Yu Moumou joined a company in Changsha in June 2015 and has served as the sales director of the company's marketing department since June 2019. Yu Moumou had learned the company's rules and regulations and labor disciplines and signed a letter of commitment when he first joined the company, and later participated in and passed the relevant training examinations. Among them, the employee reward and punishment management system was approved by the resolution of the first employee congress of the company's labor union. Article 22 of Appendix 2 Labor Discipline clearly stipulates that "anyone who entrusts a person or a person to clock in or falsely checks attendance may be terminated from the labor relationship."
In April 2020, the company discovered that Yu used a fingerprint film to check in and clock in on behalf of his colleagues. In the same month, Yu Moumou issued written materials to the company, admitting that he had punched in on behalf of others twice since March. Later, because Yu had repeatedly asked people to clock in or make fake attendance checks, which seriously violated the company's rules and regulations and labor disciplines, after consulting the company's labor union, the company issued a written notice of termination of the labor relationship to Yu, and terminated the employment relationship. The labor relationship with Yu XX.
Yu Moumou was dissatisfied and filed a lawsuit with the court after preliminary labor arbitration, requiring the company to pay more than 230,000 yuan in economic compensation for illegal termination of the contract. Yu Moumou claimed that the labor contract he signed with the company did not mention that the act of clocking in on behalf of others was a serious violation of the company's rules and regulations, and that the company had already fined him for the above behavior. After that, the company unilaterally terminated the labor contract It is illegal.
The company argued that after obtaining surveillance video in March 2020, Yu Moumou asked others to clock in 5 times and clocked in 8 times on behalf of others in that month alone, seriously violating the company's rules and regulations and labor disciplines, and before issuing written materials. It is sometimes suspected of being deliberately concealed. In addition, through investigation, the company found that in the marketing department where Yu worked, many people checked in each other and falsely checked in attendance by making fingerprint films. The company believed that Yu, as the sales manager of the marketing department, took the lead in false attendance, derelict in his duties, and was of a bad nature.
"In this case, the company clearly stipulated in the "Employee Reward and Punishment Management System" that 'the employment relationship can be terminated by entrusting a person or a person to clock in or false attendance', and the system passed the resolution of the company's employee representative conference and fulfilled the democratic procedure. , Yu also learned to be familiar with and recognized the system, so the system is binding on Yu." Deng Xin, assistant judge of the First Civil Trial Division of Yuelu District Court, introduced the case to reporters.
Deng Xin said that workers’ false attendance not only caused significant damage to the employer, but also violated the principle of good faith and basic professional ethics. Only by faithfully practicing the principle of good faith can we not only improve the occupational security of workers, but also promote the employer to employ workers in accordance with the law and regulations, and ultimately achieve a win-win situation for workers and employers.
After the trial, the court held that my country’s labor laws and regulations stipulate that workers have the obligation to abide by labor disciplines and professional ethics. If the worker seriously violates labor disciplines or the employer’s rules and regulations, the employer may terminate the labor contract. Therefore, the court rejected Yu Moumou’s relevant litigation claims.
Yu appealed against the first-instance verdict, and the Changsha Intermediate People's Court upheld the original verdict in the second instance.
Reporter: Guo Jiaojiao
Source: Political and Legal Channel
Articles are uploaded by users and are for non-commercial browsing only. Posted by: Lomu, please indicate the source: https://www.daogebangong.com/en/articles/detail/yuan-gong-yong-zhi-wen-mo-da-ka-kao-qin-bei-ci-tui-hou-zhuang-gao-gong-si-pan-le.html
支付宝扫一扫 
评论列表（196条）
测试