Enterprises must strictly abide by the red line of the law when evaluating employees.
At the end of the year, many companies began to put the year-end assessment on the agenda. For employees, assessment is an important factor in job promotion, personal income and other evaluations. However, in the face of all kinds of strange assessments set by individual enterprises, employees can often only passively accept them.
The basic premise for an employer to evaluate the performance and ability of employees is that it must have a clear appraisal system, and the appraisal system and content must comply with the basic requirements of the Labor Law and other relevant laws, and must not cross the legal red line. Huang Leping, director of the Beijing Yilian Labor Law Aid and Research Center, reminded in an interview with the reporter of "Rule of Law" that no matter what purpose and form the employer uses to evaluate employees, they must strictly abide by the law, and employees should also continuously improve their awareness of protecting their legitimate rights and interests, and should resolutely defend their rights once there is a violation of the legitimate rights and interests of employees.
"There are many kinds of employees.
Recently, Chen Nanzhang, who works at an Internet company in Beijing's Chaoyang District, only arrived home at about 10:30 p.m., because he "voluntarily" worked more than two hours at his unit after work.
The reason why this voluntary is in quotation marks is because overtime is not Chen Nanzhang's original intention, he just chose to work overtime in order to prove his "diligence" to the unit like other employees. Although the employer clearly stated that overtime work is voluntary, in the year-end appraisal of employees, there are options for the number of overtime hours and the duration of overtime. The department manager also reminded employees that overtime in December was "important", so colleagues silently chose to work overtime.
The reporter learned that it is not uncommon for employees to choose "voluntary" overtime to assess their work enthusiasm and work attitude.
Jian Aili, who works in an advertising company in Haidian District, Beijing, told reporters that her unit does not require employees to work overtime, but every day after work, employees who choose to go home directly and employees who work overtime in the unit must punch in and sign on different **.
In this way, it is very obvious who works overtime and who does not. Jian Aili revealed that the unit leaders have also made it clear that overtime statistics are one of the indicators to assess the work attitude of employees, and many employees can only choose to work overtime in desperation, and now the unit has formed a soft "mandatory overtime" atmosphere.
In addition to the common overtime assessment, the reporter noticed that some companies have set up all kinds of strange employee assessment items, such as some employers require employees to publish relevant links in the work group of the unit on personal social software every daySome employers will count the number of articles that employees have liked for a period of timeSome employers set up reading, exercise and other check-in tasks after work, which is called to assess the self-discipline of employees after work.
What's more, some employees of the company reported to reporters that they had also experienced the "job-hopping trap" designed by the suspected unit.
Lu Ning, a young man from Beijing who has been in an e-commerce company for less than a year, is favored by department leaders because of his rich network resources and strong work ability. Not long ago, a headhunting company suddenly took the initiative to contact him if he was willing to change jobs, because he had not submitted his resume online recently, and Lu Ning directly refused. Later, he learned from a familiar colleague that the job hopping opportunity was suspected to be made by the unit looking for a familiar headhunting company, in order to grasp the employees' work intentions for next year, and to test the employees' loyalty to the company.
The strange assessment is suspected of violating the law.
Employers may set up some appraisal items as a means of evaluating employees, but they must be carried out legally and reasonably within the framework prescribed by law. Huang Leping cited "overtime" as an assessment item in some units, saying that the law has strict requirements for enterprises to work overtime, and Article 41 of the Labor Law clearly stipulates that due to the needs of production and operation, employers can extend their working hours after consultation with trade unions and workers, and generally not exceed one hour per day;If it is necessary to extend the working hours due to special reasons, the extended working hours shall not exceed three hours per day, but shall not exceed thirty-six hours per month, under the condition of ensuring the health of the workers. Article 31 of the Labor Contract Law stipulates that an employer shall not compel or covertly compel an employee to work overtime, and if the employer arranges overtime, it shall pay the employee overtime pay in accordance with the relevant provisions of the state.
However, in practice, most employers not only fail to reach an agreement with the employee on the overtime arrangement, but also do not give the employee the corresponding overtime remuneration, but require the employee to carry out "compulsory overtime" through seemingly "soft" means such as the so-called employee appraisal, which is suspected of violating the Labor Law, the Labor Contract Law and other relevant laws and regulations, and infringing on the legitimate rights and interests of the employee.
In response to the behavior of some employers that require employees to link to the unit in personal social software such as Moments, and use it as the assessment content, Huang Leping believes that this situation depends on whether the employee's specific work is related to traffic promotion, etc., if it is unrelated, the employer still requires it to be in social media and uses it as the assessment standard, and its behavior has been suspected of violating the Labor Contract Law and other relevant laws and regulations.
In addition, the Civil Code stipulates that citizens enjoy the right to privacy in accordance with the law, and employees' personal social media accounts should be managed by individuals, and employers have no right to interfere.
Form a joint force to resolutely defend rights.
Why is it not uncommon for employers to have strange assessments?In the view of the professor of the School of Labor Economics of Capital University of Economics, the long-term imbalance between labor and management has made some employers abuse their dominant position, and then set up all kinds of strange assessment items for workers.
Huang Leping agreed, pointing out that the current assessment content set by some employers has gone beyond the relevant laws and regulations such as the Labor Law and crossed the legal red line, indicating that the management level of many employers is not legal and compliant enough, and the awareness of the rule of law is weak, resulting in the abuse of management authority in practice.
It is not excluded that some employers add various assessment indicators to force employees to leave their jobs voluntarily, or to dismiss employees to achieve the purpose of reducing labor costs. In this regard, Huang Leping pointed out that even if some employers dismiss employees on the grounds of "failing to pass the year-end assessment", they must strictly follow the labor contract law, inform the employee in advance, and terminate the labor contract with the employee through due legal means and procedures, and pay corresponding compensation or compensation.
During the interview, the reporter learned that in the face of the strange assessment of the unit, employees in a relatively disadvantaged position often choose to swallow their anger and dare not speak out.
Huang Leping pointed out that if workers blindly swallow their anger, it may encourage employers to formulate more unreasonable regulations, so workers should continue to improve their legal awareness and knowledge of rights protection. For example, when an enterprise formulates an appraisal system or standard, it often leaves behind words or other relevant evidence, and workers should pay attention to collecting relevant evidence, and at the same time pay attention to forming a synergy with other colleagues, and give full play to the role of the trade union to jointly defend their rights through collective strength.
Safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of employees requires the formation of a joint force. Tian Siwei, a professor at the School of Economic Law of East China University of Political Science and Law, suggested that on the one hand, it is necessary to strengthen the role of labor inspection, and carry out special investigations on enterprises in a combination of regular inspections and irregular spot checks. At the same time, convenient and smooth reporting channels should be established for employees to facilitate the timely protection of their rights. In addition, enterprises should also pay attention to balancing the relationship between management rights and workers' rights and interests, and consider introducing social forces to form a joint regulatory force in a timely manner to jointly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of employees and draw a red line for the management behavior of enterprises.
For example, in the rules and regulations formulated by some units, the rules and regulations formulated by some units link the late arrival of employees with the deduction of annual leave, and some even stipulate that employees will be fined by the unit for continuous leave. In this regard, Huang Leping suggested that enterprises should hire a professional legal team or legal personnel to participate in the formulation of corporate rules and regulations, employee appraisal systems, etc., and at the same time should solicit the opinions and suggestions of employees, so as to be open, fair and just, so as to ensure that they have legitimacy and operability and avoid legal risks.
*: Rule of Law**).
Editor: Zhao Ke].
*: Rule of Law**).