What's wrong with this lawyer?!-Chapter 794

Chapter 794: Chapter 254: Company Fines and Salary Confidentiality Chapter 794 -254: Company Fines and Salary Confidentiality About the company regulations issue, that’s really an old topic.

The Labor Contract Law Article 4 has a clear provision:

When an employer formulates, amends, or decides on regulations and major issues directly related to the employees’ personal interests such as labor remuneration and working practices, they must discuss and propose plans and opinions through the workers’ congress or all employees, and determine them through equal negotiation with the labor union or employee representatives.

Similarly, these provisions that directly affect the employees’ personal interests must be made public or known to the employees.

Nowadays, even slightly formal companies are handling this “well”.

For instance, many workers sign a lot of documents when they join, which include notifications about these regulations.

They just bring them over for you to sign, you sign and then you get to work, and if you don’t sign, you can’t work; so, basically, everyone signs.

There’s nothing much actually, employers are still in a dominant position, if you don’t do the job, there are plenty of others who will.

...

However, if you search through the judgments of the past few years related to labor regulations, you will find that there are not a few cases where company regulations have been deemed invalid because their establishment was not in accordance with the democratic process or because they were not made public.

For example, there was a similar case last year in The Capital.

It involved a real estate development company, and the company was not small; by all accounts, such a company should have known about this provision by the 23rd year.

After all, the Labor Contract Law has been in place for how many years.

However, in the case, they indeed could not provide evidence that the democratic process had been followed.

On the contrary, the evidence they presented was the labor contract, which stipulated the circumstances under which the labor contract could be terminated with the employee and stated that the employee should check the company management regulations through the OA system.

This is also a common tactic used by some companies nowadays, which is to include a lot of content in the labor contract, incorporating rules that might have been placed in the regulations into the contract.

This tactic is actually very clever.

Updated from freewёbnoνel.com.

For example, they set rules such as if a problem occurs, a written warning is issued once; if you accumulate two warnings in a year, you can be dismissed, and it’s directly written into the contact in bold to catch your attention.

A worker who doesn’t know much about the law, tell me, wouldn’t they be scared.

But if we analyze it thoroughly, we know that Labor Contract Law Article 39 stipulates only a few specific circumstances under which a labor contract can be terminated, these are mandatory explicit provisions, and there are no blanket rules.

So no matter what your company does, you can’t override this rule, and this has nothing to do with contractual autonomy, because the labor contract must first be bound by the “Labor Contract Law”, and only then by the “Civil Code” of contracts.

Special laws are to take precedence over general laws.

This is the conclusion after detailed analysis, but in reality, many people don’t know this and are easily intimidated by the company, saying that since you signed the contract yourself, you can’t go back on it, you have to accept it.

And then they are bluffed.

There’s also the matter of asking employees to check the regulations through the OA system; no matter how you ask them to look, if your important regulations did not go through the democratic process, they are invalid.

Thus, the company lost the lawsuit.

Now Old Tang is expressing the same idea.

“Judgment Chief, I’ve searched through all the evidence submitted by the other party, but I couldn’t find any content about the democratic process of regulations,”

“In other words, this company just picked up a book of regulations and said we have this rule, the party violated it, so we fired him.”

“Such regulation with no evidence to be directly used to bind the workers, that’s just ludicrous…”

Old Tang’s mouth is his strongest weapon; anyway, President Liu couldn’t help it when he heard this and burst out.

“What do you mean, what are you implying, I spend my own money to run a company, and I still need to go through some workers’ congress and get those workers to agree to regulations?

Why do I run a company at all, to find trouble for myself?”

“My regulations are invalid, you say they are invalid, and who do you think you are!”

President Liu stood up and pointed at Old Tang, unleashing a string of low-quality insults, and Old Bai on the side couldn’t hold him back.

But Old Tang didn’t retort, he just silently looked towards the Judgment Chief.

Indeed, the Judgment Chief’s face turned dark and he banged the gavel forcefully saying, “Order, please!

The plaintiff must observe court discipline and not speak without permission!”

After the Judgment Chief spoke, Old Bai tried all sorts of persuasions, and it took a great deal of effort to finally calm President Liu down.

Disrupting the order of the court doesn’t mean an automatic penalty upon such an occurrence; it is for the judge to decide.

Some judges are simply the type who think it’s better to avoid trouble if possible, as long as the proceedings can continue, they will let it continue, at most with a few criticisms.

After all, if a judicial suggestion is issued, whether it is a fine or detention, reports await them afterwards.

The same goes for anyone else, if they can just muddle through the hearing, they probably prefer not to stir up unnecessary trouble.

Watching President Liu sit down and keep quiet, the Judgment Chief then said, “Please continue, defense counsel.”

Old Tang then continued, “I see the plaintiff is a bit anxious, don’t hurry…”

Seeing that the Judgment Chief’s expression was turning sour again, Old Tang smiled and continued, “Alright, let’s put aside the invalidity of the regulations, the deduction of wages itself is also problematic.”