In actual work, employees often appear late and leave early in the past attendance process, but the company did not issue a written warning notice in time, and later the company dismissed the employee directly on the grounds that the employee was late and left early more times as a serious disciplinary violation?
If you encounter a unit that also operates in this way, how should you protect your legitimate rights and interests? Today we will share this case with you, hoping to give you a warning for your work! The company information and personal information in the case are hidden and replaced, not true information, for your reference only!
If a labor dispute arises due to an employer's decision to dismiss, dismiss, dismiss, terminate the labor contract, reduce labor remuneration, calculate the employee's working years, etc., the employer shall bear the burden of proof.
In the labor relationship, the employer has the right to manage the employee's attendance, and the employer, as the manager, shall promptly and clearly inform the employee of the attendance method and specific requirements, and shall also deal with the employee in a timely manner if the employee violates the attendance discipline requirements.
In this case, Mr. Li did not recognize the employee handbook, attendance records and attendance record notification emails submitted by Company A. Company A's self-submitted employee handbook states that attendance statistics are the main basis for calculating salaries, bonuses and benefits.
The attendance records provided by the company show that since August 2020, Li Moumou has had a large number of clock-ins and clock-ins later than 9 o'clock every month, that is, the lateness advocated by Company A, but Company A has not dealt with this for a long time and paid wages and other labor benefits to Li Moumou normally, and fully assessed Li's performance performance under the condition of monthly performance appraisal.
At the same time, according to the employee handbook provided by Company A, even if an employee is late or leaves early, he or she should be given a written warning or serious warning according to the number of times he is late or early in the month, but in this case, there is no evidence that Company A gave Li a corresponding warning in accordance with the employee handbook.
In this case, the company's decision to terminate the labor relationship lacked a certain degree of reasonableness in June 2021 by directly acting as a cumulative late arrival of 78 times from June 25, 2020 to June 25, 2021 by Li Moumou, which violated the company's rules and regulations and made the decision to terminate the labor relationship.
Company A was dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment and appealed to the court of second instance.
The court of second instance held that Company A should provide evidence that the employment relationship with Mr. Li had been legally terminated. The employee handbook submitted by Company A states that attendance statistics are the main basis for calculating salaries, bonuses and benefits.
The attendance records submitted by Company A show that Li Moumou has been late for clocking in a large number of times later than 9 o'clock every month since August 2020, but he has fully assessed Li's performance results under the condition that he conducts monthly performance appraisals during the litigation period.
The employee handbook provided by Company A stipulates that even if an employee is late or leaves early, he should be given a written warning or serious warning according to the number of lateness and early departure in the month, but Company A did not give a corresponding warning to Mr. Li in accordance with the employee handbook.
Therefore, the court of second instance held that Company A directly claimed that Li Moumou was late for a total of 78 times in June 2021, violated the company's rules and regulations, and the decision to terminate the labor relationship lacked certain reasonableness, and should be illegally terminated.
The court of second instance ruled as follows, rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.
Through this case, we can know that if you have a labor dispute with your employer, we must collect reasonable and effective evidence in a timely manner, and we ordinary workers must have the awareness of labor risk prevention. Evidence collection recommends that you follow the following lines:
First, if the conditions are met, try to collect documentary evidence. For example, pay slips, copies of notices issued by the company, etc.
Second, in the absence of documentary evidence, some electronic evidence may also be collected. Such as email, WeChat chat records, electronic attendance records, etc.
Third, in the process of playing with the unit, you can mail your personal written opinion to the legal representative of the unit in writing. This written opinion must be written in accordance with the requirements of the law, so that the sub-operation can be more effective.
No matter what kind of unit we workers work in, it is possible to be dismissed or laid off by the unit. It is of great significance for us to learn more about labor rights protection skills in our own careers.
This issue of the case is for your reference only, if you have different opinions, please leave a comment in the comment area to interact! If you think the case is helpful or warning to your work, you can like and bookmark!