Early Age Of Service Can Not Prove That The Rights And Interests Of Employees Are Blocked.

Among the outstanding cases of the ten trade unions' legal aid recently selected by the Wenzhou Federation of trade unions, there is a typical case of economic compensation disputes.

Zhou, an electrician at a service center in Wenzhou, has entered the center since August 1998.

In April 30, 2016, the center resigned from the notice that the labor contract was no longer renewed.

The two sides could not reach agreement on economic compensation, resulting in disputes.

According to the provisions of the labor contract law, Zhou made a request to the center to pay the economic compensation for a year and a month.

But the center replied to Zhou. According to the labor contract signed by both parties, Zhou was recruited in 2014 and worked in other units before. If the economic compensation is needed, it is only two months' compensation.

After that, Zhou submitted an arbitration application to the Wenzhou labor and personnel dispute arbitration committee. The staff told Zhou after the first trial, with the existing evidence, its arbitration request may not be supported. Zhou suggested applying for legal aid.

Zhou then appeals to the Wenzhou workers' rights protection center. After receiving the application of Zhou's assistance, the Wenzhou workers' Rights Protection Center appointed lawyers to undertake the case.

After accepting the case, the aid lawyer conducted a detailed talk with Zhou himself, analyzed and categorized the arbitration application and evidence submitted by Zhou, and obtained the evidence submitted by the Employer from the arbitration tribunal for the first time.

In conjunction with Zhou's evidence, the lawyers argued that the focus of the dispute between the two sides was mainly on whether or not Zhou entered the post and whether there was a conversion unit after entering the office.

But according to Zhou's existing evidence, it can only prove the existence of labor relations with the service center after March 2014, but it can not prove that Zhou established a labor relationship with the center in 1998.

After many communication and enquiries, Zhou occasionally mentioned that one of his family's signature was signed by Lee, a person in charge of the service center in 2003.

But the worker proved that the time of issue was not the person in charge of Li's formal service in the service center.

After many visits to the relevant departments by the aid lawyer, he finally found a Lee's resume, which clearly indicated that he had been the person in charge of the service center before his official appointment.

According to this document, the relevant departments have issued a full term of appointment of Li in the service center, combined with the proof of work before Zhou, in order to jointly prove Zhou's entry time.

For Zhou

There is evidence of whether there is a written labor contract between 2009 and 2014 with other units, according to the evidence of whether there is a conversion unit.

In response, Zhou said that there were two units on the address of the service center, one is the service center, the other is a similar industry, and the main personnel of the two units are in agreement. For this reason, the aid lawyer thinks that this is the same address, the same staff and two brands of operation. It should be judged from the angle of the laborers that Zhou is the staff of the center.

Finally, the arbitral tribunal fully adopted the advice of the aid counsel, supporting the fact that Zhou proposed to work from 1998 until 2016.

This is a typical enterprise's goal of shortening the seniority of the staff through continuous conversion and signing with the laborers. In order to force the workers to accept the economic compensation for the seniority or low amount of the short term, when they break the labor relationship with the employees.

When signing a labor contract, two units are signed annually to sign labor contracts with the same worker. Laborers are often forced to accept such unfair contracts or treatment in order to keep their jobs.

In this regard, the assistance counsel confirmed the situation of the two units in the same address and the same personnel through the initial entry time and field visits, and explained the facts of the case in the arbitration tribunal, and obtained the support of the arbitration tribunal, which effectively safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of the recipients.

In addition, the Aid Counsel believes that to eliminate the above situation, in addition to requiring the employer to carry out the provisions of the labor contract law in accordance with the law, we should also establish some punishing measures. Otherwise, with the strong position of the employing units at present, it is impossible for the workers in a relatively vulnerable position to protect their vital interests.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.