The security guard was fired because of sleeping and chatting at work, and the appeal was not convinced. The court’s judgment was on

Zhang, who has worked in a security company in Nanjing for 8 years, has worked for 8 years. When he retired for less than half a year before retiring, he was reported by the company to leave the post, sleep, to accommodate strangers, and to violate the company's rules and regulations early during his post. Before being dismissed. Zhang was not convinced and sued the company to the court. How would the court judge?

According to the case disclosed by the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Zhang went to a company to engage in security work in 2013, and the last labor contract was ended on June 30, 2021.

On February 10, 2021, a company fired Zhang to dismiss Zhang on the grounds that Zhang left the post and sleep, violating the company's rules and regulations, and caused a bad impact.

Zhang did not accept the company's decision and sued the company to the court. The company issued a handling report and a video signed by Zhang himself to the court to prove that Zhang had violated rules and regulations such as chatting with others, dismissal, and sleeping during work.

In this regard, Zhang said that if he did not sign the penalty report, the company would not allow attendance, and he would be expelled on the grounds of absenteeism. The so -called unauthorized leave, chatting, and sleeping are not real. From the duty room to the washing hands, there are two buildings. It takes 10 minutes to go back and forth. It may be just not at the time of inspection. Answer to the owner and visitor's inquiry. This is the work responsibility of the security guard, not a chat. The video provided by a company's sleep was just a screenshot, not a complete video. At that time, Zhang did not sleep.

The court considers

A company's illegal termination of labor contracts

Should pay Zhang's compensation

1. The rules and regulations are formulated without democratic procedures. The evidence provided by the defendant shows that the company's rules and regulations are approved by the work conference of the personnel level or above of the company. They have not been determined with employee representatives or trade unions in accordance with the law, and cannot be determined with employee representatives or union.

2. The record of violations is not clear. In the facts of the facts, the records of three employees' handling reports are not clear, and the duty room is equipped with monitoring. The defendant has the ability to fix evidence in a timely manner.

3. The defendant's proof cannot be able to bear the adverse consequences that cannot be proof. The defendant's management monitoring, closest to the evidence, should have unfavorable consequences because the defendant failed to retain the surveillance video.

4. Job responsibilities should not exceed reasonable regulatory requirements. Determine whether the behavior of the workers is seriously violated, and should be judged rationally in conjunction with the industry characteristics of the employer and the specific jobs of the workers.

A community security guard, when working in the duty room, "not allowed to play, sleep, chat, read books, read newspapers, listen to radios, play mobile phones, etc.", also added a "equal" word. On the surface, many reasons for the company to dismiss employees. In fact, there are many "pits" in it. It was thought that it was lifted in accordance with the rules, but it may be identified by the arbitration agency or court as illegal lifting.

For the security guards with a monthly salary of more than 3,000 yuan, twice "beating" can be dismissed without admonition. Such regulations are too harsh to workers.

In summary, the defendant's illegal termination of the labor contract shall pay the plaintiff 57,000 yuan to the plaintiff.

Zhang has signed the penalty report,

Admit that you have chatting, losing the post, chatting,

Disciplinary violations such as outbound post,

Why is the court still sentenced the unit to fail?

Judge said:

The court found that Zhang's work location was fixed. In the duty room of the unit, the duty room was monitored. As long as the unit preserved the fixed evidence, it was easy to prove that Zhang had chatting with others and losing posts.

Zhang said that he was called out of the toilet. As long as he found the surveillance video, and see if Zhang's position was exceeded of a reasonable time limit, he could be verified. However, the unit believes that Zhang has signed the penalty report and has sufficient evidence. This view is biased.

For workers with a low level of culture and weak self -protection awareness, employers should also fix relevant evidence at the same time, such as monitoring videos in this case.

At the same time, in this case, the penalty report of the employer is also irregular. For example, only the specific start and end time of Zhang's outbound post and the unscrupulous outbound post. During the trial, when Zhang argued that when he went to the toilet briefly, the unit faced a passive situation.

It is necessary for employers to strengthen management.

It is an indispensable guarantee for its production and operation activities.

But too harsh,

More than necessary, reasonable rules and regulations,

It may be illegal because of its content,

The court is determined that it is not restrained to the workers!

not

Recommended in the future

not

not

Source: Shanxi Evening News All -Media Comprehensive

- END -