The father was critically ill, but the company was not allowed to leave, and the employee was expelled from taking his own leave--
The correct opening method for enterprises to exercise management power attracts attention
Our reporter Tang Shu, "Workers Daily" (version 06 on December 02, 2021)
Read the tips
The father of the employee was critically ill and asked for leave. The company did not approve the leave and urged the employee to return to work, causing labor disputes.
The court supported the employee’s appeal and ruled that the two parties terminated the labor relationship and the company paid economic compensation. It also pointed out that when the employee’s immediate family was critically ill, the company would not approve the employee’s leave application, which was inconsistent with the requirements of socialist core values and was contrary to The traditional culture of filial piety is neither sensible nor reasonable.
The father of the employee was critically ill, and the company refused to approve the leave, which caused labor disputes.
After the first instance, second instance, and retrial of the case, the third-tier courts made a unanimous judgment: the two parties terminate the labor relationship and the company pays economic compensation.
A few days ago, this judgment of the Anhui court triggered discussion and concern.
What is the correct way for employees to take vacations?
What is the standard for the employer to approve or not approve leave?
Where is the boundary for enterprises to exercise management power?
Father is critically ill, the company will not grant leave
In April 2017, Ms. Bai from Hefei, Anhui Province joined a home furnishing company in Hefei for sales.
In April 2019, she signed a one-year labor contract with the company again.
On October 31, 2019, Ms. Bai asked the company for leave due to her father’s critical illness until November 3, 2019, which was approved by the company.
On November 5, Ms. Bai asked for leave again until November 10, but the company did not approve it this time.
On November 7, the company’s personnel urged Ms. Bai to return to work through WeChat: “If you don’t go to work tomorrow, you will automatically leave.” The next day, the company sent a notice to Ms. Bai again, asking her to return to the company to complete the leave procedures.
On November 9, Ms. Bai's father passed away, and she never returned to work at the company.
Since then, Ms. Bai’s application for labor arbitration was rejected, and she filed a lawsuit requesting the court to order the termination of the labor relationship between the two parties on November 8, 2019, and the company to pay 17,910 yuan in economic compensation.
Ms. Bai said that she did not have any behavior that did not perform the leave procedures. The first time she asked for leave was approved on Dingding. Later, because her father was critically ill, she asked for leave again. She also performed on Dingding in accordance with the company's regulations. However, the company delayed the approval procedure.
She believes that when her father passed away, the company deliberately did not review the leave process, which was a disguised dismissal of herself.
The court of first instance held that the home furnishing company, knowing that Ms. Bai’s father was seriously ill, issued a notice requesting her to return to work and complete the leave procedures, and Ms. Bai’s father passed away on November 9. At this time, the company’s request was for employees. Demanding.
Therefore, when Ms. Bai requested the termination of the labor relationship during the arbitration, it was deemed that the two parties had reached an agreement through consultation, and the two parties were judged to terminate the labor relationship on November 8, 2019; the defendant company paid the plaintiff's economic compensation for the termination of the labor contract of 17,910 yuan.
The home furnishing company refused to accept it and appealed to the Hefei Intermediate People’s Court, thinking that the company had approved Ms. Bai’s first request for leave, but did not approve her second request for leave because it had violated the company’s operating interests by not being on duty for a long time. The company did not agree that the second request for leave did not violate the law.
The Hefei Intermediate People's Court rejected the appeal in the second instance and upheld the original verdict.
The company applied to the Anhui Higher People's Court for a retrial.
The Anhui Provincial Higher People's Court found that Ms. Bai applied for personal leave to the company because her father was critically ill and needed escort. The reason was justified, and she had applied for leave in accordance with the method prescribed by the company.
The company emphasizes operating profit. When an employee’s immediate family members are critically ill, the employee’s application for leave will not be approved, and “if you don’t go to work tomorrow, you will automatically resign”, which is inconsistent with the requirements of socialist core values and goes against the traditional culture of filial piety. , Is neither sensible nor reasonable.
The Higher People's Court of Anhui Province made a ruling and rejected the retrial application.
Employers should exercise good faith in exercising management power
“The labor relationship is not a simple cooperative relationship, but is personally dependent and subordinate. As a manager, the employer has the right to manage the worker, and it has the right to approve the leave application submitted by the worker." Anhui Haohua Lawyer Lawyer Hu Min of the firm believes that “but the employer cannot be too capricious in exercising its management power, and must follow normal ethics, filial piety, etc.”.
The "Worker Daily" reporter searched and found that labor disputes caused by vacations are not alone.
At the beginning of this year, in the much-concerned case of “resignation due to the death of the father for 8 days without approval for a forced leave”, the court finally determined that the company had illegally terminated the labor contract and should pay compensation for the employee's illegal termination of the labor contract.
The trial judge of the case stated that “the boundary and the way the employer exercises the management power should be in good faith. When the worker asks for leave due to specific difficulties, the employer should perform the duty of an ordinary kind person for the leave review, and should respect folk customs and be compassionate to the employees. ".
Hu Min reminded that Article 39 of the Labor Contract Law clearly stipulates the conditions for the employer to unilaterally terminate the labor contract. As the most serious way to discipline employees, the employer needs to be cautious. Once the procedures are not proper, they may violate the law.
"On the one hand, if the employer dissolves the labor contract against the employee, it must bear the burden of proof for its legality and rationality; on the other hand, Article 43 of the Labor Contract Law stipulates that the employer unilaterally terminates the labor contract. The trade union should be notified of the reasons in advance, listen to the trade union’s opinions, and notify the trade union in writing of the handling results. Trade union supervision is also to avoid illegal termination of the labor contract.” Hu Min said.
Communicating and negotiating to build a harmonious labor relationship
According to the labor contract law, workers have the right to vacation, but the exercise of their rights should comply with the provisions of laws and regulations, and should be regulated by the legal employment management rights of the enterprise. Except for statutory holidays and rest days, workers’ vacations should go through Approved by the employer.
The reporter searched through the China Judgment Documents website and found that some employees were dismissed as absenteeism because they were not approved for leave, which caused labor disputes, and finally the employees lost the lawsuit.
In 2019, Zhang Li (pseudonym), a gas station salesperson, asked the unit for more than 20 days of leave on the grounds that her son was sick and needed care, and then applied for half a year of leave for the same reason, but the company did not approve it.
After that, Zhang Li submitted a written application again, requesting the unit to agree to take care of the children without pay for two years. The company did not agree after research.
During this period, Zhang Li has been absent from work on the grounds of taking care of the children and the company's delay in granting leave.
Zhang Li, who was dismissed by the company, applied for arbitration on the grounds that the company illegally terminated the labor contract. Later, the company refused to accept the arbitration award and filed a lawsuit in the court.
The first-instance court ruled that the company’s termination of the labor contract was legal and not to pay Zhang Li’s economic compensation.
Coincidentally, an employee in Shanghai was not approved for leave on the grounds of her daughter's marriage, and was dismissed from the company after leaving the job.
The court held that the reason for the leave was not a statutory reason or other emergency circumstances that could make up the leave formalities afterwards, and he did not return to work after expressly opposed by the unit, it should be regarded as absenteeism, and it was judged that the company did not pay compensation for the illegal termination of the labor contract.
"Building a harmonious labor relationship requires mutual communication and negotiation between labor and management." Hu Min believes that, on the one hand, workers should communicate with the unit when encountering difficult situations requiring leave, and provide materials and explanations as much as possible.
On the other hand, for employers, laws and regulations are the lowest red lines for corporate management. Corporate management should consider corporate culture more on this basis. Care for employees is also a corporate culture creation, which is the humanity of corporate culture. The embodiment of temperature.