Workload overload Employees dismissed for saying "can't finish" The court ruled so

The workload was overloaded, and the employee said that he could not finish the work, and he was dismissed The Beijing Dongcheng court ruled that the two parties continued to perform the labor contract

□ Zhang Xuehong, reporter of this newspaper

□ This newspaper correspondent Su Yunda

When the tasks assigned by the company exceed reasonable limits and the employee says that the task is unreasonable and cannot be completed, can the company dismiss the employee for this reason? Mr. Yuan, a clerk, encountered such a thing. After being assigned multiple online tasks and required to be completed within 7 days, Mr. Yuan replied that "it is necessary to complete it in a team, and it is not feasible to complete it independently", and he was subsequently dismissed. Recently, the Dongcheng District People's Court of Beijing heard the dispute and ruled that the two parties continued to perform the labor contract.

In August 2008, Mr. Yuan joined a company as the manager of the information technology department. In 8, Mr. Yuan signed an open-term employment contract with the Company. In July 2014, the company dismissed Mr. Yuan as a team leader and adjusted him to an individual contributor on the grounds that he was not qualified for the job. On September 2021 of that year, the company assigned a task to Mr. Yuan by email, requiring him to complete it within 7 days. On September 9, the company's leaders made arrangements for Mr. Yuan's work again by email, believing that half of the more than 12 tasks assigned by him still needed to be completed, and required him to complete them within 7 working days. On September 9, Mr. Yuan replied to the leadership, saying that the tasks assigned to him need to be completed by teamwork, and it is not feasible and universal for individuals to complete independently. On November 20, 20, the company terminated the labor contract on the grounds that Mr. Yuan seriously violated the rules and regulations of the employer and violated the labor discipline and professional ethics that the employee should observe.

After a dispute arose between the two parties, after labor arbitration, Mr. Yuan filed a lawsuit in court, requesting an order confirming that he and the company had established an employment contract relationship since August 2008, resuming the employment relationship between the two parties and reissuing the performance award for 8.

During the trial, the company claimed that Mr. Yuan violated the provisions of the Employee Handbook that "disobey or refuse to accept work assignments or transfers or commands without justifiable reasons", and the company could terminate the labor contract and did not agree to restore the labor relationship.

After hearing, the Dongcheng District Court held that the Employee Handbook stipulates that the labor contract can be terminated if "disobedience or refusal to accept work assignment, transfer, or command without justifiable reasons", and the focus of the dispute in this case was whether the employee's refusal to accept the work tasks arranged by the company was justified. The plaintiff's direct leader assigned the plaintiff more than 9 online tasks on the morning of September 12, and asked them to be completed within 20 days. However, in the process of communicating the follow-up task, the two sides disagreed, and the plaintiff also proposed that the team required to complete the task was not something that any colleague could complete independently. However, the defendant did not provide sufficient evidence to prove the amount of tasks, the nature of the tasks, and whether personal independence could be completed, so it cannot be concluded that the plaintiff refused to comply with the work arrangements just because the plaintiff could not complete the work tasks on time.

The court held that the plaintiff was the team leader before the job adjustment, and the individual contributor after the adjustment, and the plaintiff's post adjustment also had an adaptation process, the defendant assigned the tasks originally assigned to the team to the plaintiff personally, although it was for personal performance, but the amount of tasks and technical whether the individual could complete it, the plaintiff also raised its own doubts, so subjectively speaking, it cannot be said that the plaintiff did not obey the work assignment without reason.

The Dongcheng District Court ruled that there was an employment relationship between the parties from August 2008 to November 8; The court did not support the continued performance of the employment contract, given that the performance award claimed by the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence. After the judgment of the first instance, the company appealed, and the original judgment was upheld in the second instance.

Li Yanhong, the presiding judge of the case, said that the employer has the right to give instructions to the employee, that is, it can assign the specific work tasks of the employee, the employee is obliged to accept the work assignment and complete the work task, and the employer also has the right to punish the behavior of disobeying the work arrangement without reason. However, the employer's exercise of disciplinary power is limited, and it should prove the reasonableness of the work arrangement, whether the work task is enforceable, and whether the work task matches the employee's ability, otherwise it will lead to the abuse of the right to work instructions, and even the use of the right to manage the work becomes an excuse for arbitrary termination. The result of such an act is intolerable, unreasonable, and groundless in law, and it will inevitably bear the legal responsibility for illegal discharge.

"There is a certain boundary for an employer to terminate a labor contract by disobeying the work arrangement, and the employer should be reasonable and standardized in matters such as work arrangement, internal assessment, and post adjustment, prudently exercise the right to work instructions on the basis of consultation and communication, and create a win-win labor relationship of consultation and cooperation." Li Yanhong said that even if the employee fails to complete the assigned tasks on time or the employer believes that the employee is not competent for a certain job, the employer also has the obligation to provide vocational training to employees to improve their skills, and should give employees an opportunity to adapt and learn and improve, and assume their due vocational training responsibilities, rather than simply terminating the labor contract.