Plaintiff Xiong Yan, female, Han nationality, born on March 8, 1986, lives at No.238, Yiyang Avenue West, Heshan District, Yiyang City, Hunan Province, with the ID number of 43090319860318094x.
Authorized Agent: Gao Yongai, lawyer of Hunan Jiufang Law Firm. The proxy authority is general proxy.
Defendant: Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd., located in Yiyang High-tech Zone Pioneer Park.
Legal representative: Zheng Mingwu, chairman of the board of directors of the company.
Authorized Agent: Cai Bo, lawyer of Hunan Jiyang Law Firm. The agency authority is special authorization.
The case of labor dispute between plaintiff Xiong Yan and defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd.) was heard in public on March 27th, 20 12, with judge Sima Hui as the presiding judge and judge Chen Jing and people's juror Xu Weijia. Plaintiff Xiong Yan, entrusted agent Gao Yongai and defendant Cai Bo, entrusted agent of Huisheng Technology Company, attended the proceedings. The case has now been closed.
Plaintiff Xiong Yan claimed that Plaintiff Xiong Yan joined the defendant Huisheng Technology Company on February/February 15, 2008. On 20th11year1February15th, the defendant Huisheng Technology Company informed the plaintiff Xiong Yan not to renew the labor contract. The two sides did not sign a labor contract when they joined the company. The defendant Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. failed to pay the social insurance fee for the plaintiff Xiong Yan since 20081February 15; Failing to pay the overtime wages of the plaintiff Xiong Yan from 20 10/0/0/0/0/month to before leaving the company; Failing to pay the legal remuneration of the plaintiff Xiong Yan for taking annual leave; Failing to pay unemployment insurance for the plaintiff Xiong Yan according to law; Failing to pay the plaintiff Xiong Yan economic compensation according to law. As a result, a dispute arose. Yiyang Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission made an arbitration award [20 1 1]No. 149, but the award found the facts wrong. Therefore, the court is requested to make a judgment, 1, and the defendant Huisheng Technology Company pays the plaintiff Xiong Yan double salary, overtime pay, economic compensation, compensation and unemployment insurance 155 739. 1 yuan; 2. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company reissued the 2008 1 February 15 to 20 10 year1February 3/day and 201year for the plaintiff Xiong Yan.
In order to prove the above facts and claims, the plaintiff Xiong Yan provided the following evidence to our hospital:
Evidence 1: Huisheng Technology Company document hs-hr- 100404, which proves the signing time and background of the contract.
Evidence II. Labor Contract (not stamped). Prove the real time of signing the contract.
Evidence 3. Notice of not renewing the labor contract. Prove the working hours and salary of the plaintiff Xiong Yan.
Evidence IV. Huisheng Technology Company document hs-hr- 100900 1. Prove overtime hours.
Evidence 5. Payroll (September 20 10). It proves that Xiong Yan, the plaintiff, did not get overtime pay and did not take annual leave.
Evidence 6. Bank self-service terminal customer receipt. Prove that the monthly working days and salary have not been paid overtime and have not taken annual leave.
Evidence VII. Award of the Municipal Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission. Prove that it has been arbitrated.
Evidence 8. Report of B-mode ultrasound examination in Yiyang Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Hunan Province. Prove that you are pregnant and cannot terminate the labor contract.
Evidence IX. Huisheng Technology's application report to Yiyang Economic Cooperation Bureau. Prove that the official seal of the unit at that time was in Chinese and English.
Evidence X. Certificate of Yiyang Guanzheng New Seal Co., Ltd.. Prove that the official seal of Huisheng Technology is lost.
Evidence 11. Network system seal certificate. It proves that Yiyang Public Security Bureau allows Yiyang Guanzheng New Seal Co., Ltd. to be the official seal of Huisheng Technology Production Unit again. The time is after August 7, 2009.
Evidence XII. Announcement of Southern Metropolis Daily on July 28, 2009. It proves that Huisheng Technology applied for seal change.
Evidence XIII. Notice and handover form of the defendant Huisheng Technology Company. It proves that the plaintiff Xiong Yan completed the work handover within the time specified by the defendant Huisheng Technology Company.
The defendant Huisheng Technology Company argued that the lawsuit filed by 1 and the plaintiff Xiong Yan had passed labor arbitration, and there was no contract agreement on the payment of double wages; 2. The plaintiff Xiong Yan belongs to the scope of the defendant Huisheng Technology Company's implementation of flexible working hours; 3. The defendant Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. is willing to pay the plaintiff Xiong Yan economic compensation, which is collected by the plaintiff Xiong Yan herself in the future, so there is no compensation problem; 4. Unemployment insurance has been handled for the plaintiff Xiong Yan, and the problem of the plaintiff Xiong Yan only exists to make up the difference; 5. Social insurance does not belong to the scope of court acceptance.
In order to prove the above facts and claims, the defendant Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. provided the following evidence to our hospital:
Evidence 1. Labor contract. Prove that the labor contract between the two parties is time-limited, and there is no agreement on double wages.
Evidence II. Yiyang Municipal Labor and Social Security Bureau's decision on administrative license. Prove that the plaintiff Xiong Yan's working system is irregular working system.
Evidence III. Notice of Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. not to renew the labor contract. It proves that our company has terminated the labor contract with the plaintiff Xiong Yan, and the compensation for the plaintiff Xiong Yan exists on the premise of handing over the work before 20 1 1 year 1 1 month 17 as stipulated in the notice.
Evidence 4. Notice. Prove that the plaintiff Xiong Yan did not work as required.
Evidence 5. Notice of Spring Festival holiday. Prove that annual leave has been arranged.
The defendant Huisheng Technology Company has the following cross-examination opinions on the evidence provided by the plaintiff Xiong Yan:
No objection to evidence 1, 5, 6 and 7; Evidence 2 is invalid without the signature of the defendant; There is objection to the purpose of proof in Evidence 3, which proves that the plaintiff Xiong Yan will only get economic compensation if she hands over her job on 20th 1 1 year1/month17th; Evidence 4 cannot be used as evidence without checking the original; There are objections to the authenticity, legality and relevance of Evidence 8; Evidence 9, 10, 11 and 12 have objections to the purpose of proof, which cannot achieve the purpose of proof of plaintiff Xiong Yan; There is no objection to the authenticity of Evidence 13, but there is objection to its purpose of proof.
The plaintiff Xiong Yan's cross-examination opinions on the evidence provided by the defendant Huisheng Technology Company are as follows:
Objection to the legality of Evidence 1; Objection to the relevance and legality of Evidence II; There is no objection to the authenticity and relevance of Evidence III, but the expiration date of the labor contract is 20 1 1 year1February15th; There is no objection to the legality and authenticity of Evidence 4, but there is objection to its relevance; There is no objection to the authenticity and legality of Evidence 5, but it cannot prove that the plaintiff Xiong Yan has taken annual leave.
Based on the evidence and cross-examination of plaintiff Xiong Yan and defendant Huisheng Technology Company, our comprehensive certification is as follows:
Evidence I, V, VI and VII given by plaintiff Xiong Yan and defendant Huisheng Science and Technology Company have no objection, which is accepted by our court; Evidence 2 and 3 given by plaintiff Xiong Yan and evidence 1 and 3 given by defendant Huisheng Technology Company reflect each other, so we accepted evidence 2 and 3 given by plaintiff Xiong Yan and evidence 1 and 3 given by defendant Huisheng Technology Company. Evidence 4 given by plaintiff Xiong Yan and evidence 2 given by defendant Huisheng Technology Company can reflect each other, proving that some employees of defendant Huisheng Technology Company implemented flexible working hours from 20 10/0/0/0/day, so this court accepted it; Evidence 8 given by plaintiff Xiong Yan is irrelevant to this case, so this court will not accept it; Evidence 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 cited by plaintiff Xiong Yan was verified by our court to be true, legitimate and relevant, and our court accepted it; The second, fourth and fifth evidences presented by the defendant Huisheng Technology Company were verified by our court to be true, legitimate and relevant, and our court accepted them.
It was found through trial that the plaintiff Xiong Yan was employed by the defendant Huisheng Science and Technology Company from 20081February 15, and no labor contract was signed. On June 20 10/2, he was appointed as the deputy director of general manager office of Huisheng Technology Company, responsible for the company's outreach and project declaration, with an average monthly salary of 4,000 yuan. On June 3, 20 10, both parties signed a supplementary labor contract, and the labor term was 20081February 15 to 201year1February/kloc-0. From 20 1 1 year 1 month, the defendant Huisheng Technology Company handled social insurance for the plaintiff Xiong Yan. On October 20 1 1 year1month 17, the defendant Huisheng Technology Company informed the plaintiff Xiong Yan not to renew the labor contract, and the contract was terminated upon expiration. And asked the plaintiff Xiong Yan to handle the work handover on that day, and promised to pay the salary of the plaintiff Xiong Yan to 20 1 1 year1February 15. 20 1 1 year1February 2, plaintiff Xiong Yan and defendant huisheng technology company went through the handover procedures. On October 20 12 1 month 16, Yiyang labor dispute arbitration commission made an arbitration award [20 1 1] No.49, ruling 1, plaintiff. 2. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company paid the plaintiff Xiong Yan the economic compensation for terminating the labor relationship12,000 yuan; 3. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company paid the plaintiff Xiong Yan unemployment insurance 2 184 yuan; 4. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company paid the plaintiff Xiong Yan 20 1 1 1 month1day to 20 1 1 year/February/kloc-0. 5. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company paid the social insurance agency the endowment insurance and medical insurance that the plaintiff Xiong Yan should bear from 20081February 15 to 201year1February 3 1 day.
It was also found out that the defendant Huisheng Technology Company applied to Yiyang Municipal Labor and Social Security Bureau on July 20, 20 10 to implement irregular work for the company's senior management, production workshop management personnel (engineers, supervisors, technicians, warehouse keepers, clerks, quality workers), administrative office personnel (procurement, finance, marketing, administration, general manager office), security guards, drivers, and personnel of the capital construction department. Yiyang Municipal Bureau of Labor and Social Security made an administrative licenseNo. [20 10] 14 according to the application of the defendant Huisheng Technology Company, allowing the defendant Huisheng Technology Company's senior management, production workshop management, security guards, drivers, infrastructure department and other personnel to implement flexible working hours for 1 year; The defendant Huisheng Science and Technology Company, except for the telephone project department, has implemented a 26-day working system every month since 20 10/0 1. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company's Spring Festival holiday time is 14 days paid holiday.
We believe that when the plaintiff Xiong Yan signed the labor contract on June 20 10/3, she knew that the contract term was from February 0 15 to June 201year 20081year. Therefore, the time for the plaintiff Xiong Yan to ask the defendant Huisheng Technology Company to pay double wages for the unsigned labor contract should be counted from June 20 10/4, and it has been more than one year since the plaintiff Xiong Yan applied for labor arbitration on June 20 1 1 year 1 1 25. Plaintiff Xiong Yan has worked in defendant Huisheng Technology Company for three years, and her annual leave is five days a year. Plaintiff Xiong Yan has enjoyed 14 days of paid leave in defendant Huisheng Technology Company every Spring Festival. Therefore, this court does not support plaintiff Xiong Yan's claim to ask defendant Huisheng Technology Company to pay annual leave salary.
Although the defendant Huisheng Science & Technology Company included general manager office in the Application Form for Employing Units to Implement Flexible Working Hours or Comprehensive Working Hours, the administrative licenseNo. [20 10] 14 made by Yiyang Labor and Social Security Bureau did not include general manager office in the implementation of flexible working hours. And the defendant Huisheng Technology Company has no evidence to prove that the deputy director of general manager office, where the plaintiff Xiong Yan works, is a senior manager of the company. Therefore, the defendant Huisheng Technology Company argues that the plaintiff Xiong Yan is a person who implements flexible working hours, and this defense reason will not be adopted by our hospital. The defendant Huisheng Science & Technology Company shall pay the plaintiff Xiong Yan overtime pay from 20 10 year 10 month/kloc-0 day to 20 1 year1month 17 day (. After the original and defendant's labor contracts expired, the defendant Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. no longer renewed the labor contract with the plaintiff Xiong Yan. According to the Labor Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, the defendant Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. should pay the plaintiff Xiong Yan economic compensation (4,000× 3 =12,000 yuan).
According to the provisions of Article 15 of the Measures for the Application and Payment of Unemployment Insurance in Hunan Province, because the defendant Huisheng Science and Technology Company stopped paying unemployment insurance premium for the plaintiff Xiong Yan, the plaintiff Xiong Yan could not enjoy unemployment insurance benefits. The arbitration award of Yiyang Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission's Yi Lao Zhong CaseNo. [20 1 1] 149 was clear, and our court supported it. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company should pay other social insurance for the plaintiff Xiong Yan, but the dispute caused by the employer's failure to pay or refuse to pay social insurance premiums is not within the scope of the people's court to hear labor dispute cases, and our court will not hear it. The defendant Huisheng Technology Company shall pay the plaintiff Xiong Yan 20 1 1 year 1 month1day to 20 1 1 year1February. Accordingly, according to Article 44 (2) of the Labor Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 1 of Interpretation III of the Labor Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 44 (1), Article 46 (5), Article 47 (1) of the Labor Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, and Unemployment Insurance in Hunan Province
1. The labor relationship between plaintiff Xiong Yan and defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. was terminated on 20 1 1 year1February 15;
2. Defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. paid plaintiff Xiong Yan 20 1 1 year 1/month1day to 201year1February.
3. Defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. paid plaintiff Xiong Yan overtime pay 16 6 15.38 yuan;
4. The defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. paid the plaintiff Xiong Yan economic compensation of12,000 yuan;
V. Defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. paid plaintiff Xiong Yan unemployment insurance 2 184 yuan.
The above * * * is RMB 36,799.38, and the defendant Hunan Huisheng Technology Co., Ltd. is limited to pay it to the plaintiff Xiong Yan within ten days after this judgment comes into effect.
If the obligation to pay money is not fulfilled within the period specified in this judgment, the interest on the debt during the delayed performance shall be doubled in accordance with the provisions of Article 229 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.
The acceptance fee of this case 10 yuan shall be borne by the defendant Hunan huisheng technology co., ltd.
If you refuse to accept this judgment, you can submit an appeal to our court within 15 days from the date of service of the judgment, and submit copies according to the number of the other parties, and appeal to Yiyang Intermediate People's Court.
Chief adjudicator Si Mahui
Judge Chen Jing
People's juror Xu Weijia
May 30, 2012
Bookkeeper Luo Longhui