1. 特殊情形下即使未签书面劳动合同,也可不予支持员工主张未订立书面劳动合同二倍工资差额的请求。在该案例中,虽然员工与公司未签订书面劳动合同,但法院认为:(1)公司办理了人事招录手续、对劳动关系进行备案登记、缴纳了社会保险,在主观意图上并无明显故意;(2)在形式上,相关书面文件和备案登记已包含书面劳动合同的实质内容,达到了确定双方权利义务的法律效果;(3)在合同目的实现上,公司未否认劳动关系,员工主张权益未受阻;(4)在法律原则上,员工对劳动合同的法律性质和未签的后果系明知,未积极主张签订劳动合同与诚信原则不符。因此,员工的主张未获支持。The employee’s request to claim the difference of double wages may not be supported under special circumstances, even if a written labor contract has not been signed. In this case, although the employee and the employer did not sign a written labor contract, the court held that: (1) the employer handled the recruitment procedures, filed and registered the labor relationship, paid social insurance, and there was no obvious intention of not signing a written contract; (2) in terms of formal aspect, the relevant written documents and filed registration have included the substance of the written labor contract, and achieved the legal effect of determining the rights and obligations of the parties; (3) in the realization of the purpose of the contract, the employer had not denied the labor relationship, the employee had not been prevented from claiming his rights and interests; (4) in the principle of law, the employee was aware of the legal nature of the labor contract and the consequences of the failure to sign the written contract, and his lack of active advocacy for the signing of the labor contract was inconsistent with the principle of good faith. Therefore, the employee’s claim was not supported.2. 用人单位以劳动者欺诈为由解除劳动合同合法性的审查标准。在一个案例中,员工职位为艺术培训学校的播音主持教师,其面试时提供虚假学历证书和小学教师资格证书,法院认为该员工的行为致使学校作出错误意思表示,构成法律意义上的欺诈;另一案例中,员工职位为销售经理,其在入职登记表的“有无法律诉讼案件纠纷或判决”一栏填写“无”,但实际该员工与前用人单位存在劳动争议,法院认为隐瞒其与前单位的涉诉情况与履行劳动合同无关联,不构成法律意义上的欺诈。Criteria for reviewing the legality of an employer’s termination of an employment contract due to employee fraud. In one case, the employee was a broadcasting teacher in an art training school, and provided false diploma and Elementary Teacher Certificate during the interview. The court held that the employee’s behavior caused the school to make a wrong manifestation of intention, which constituted fraud in the legal sense. In another case, the employee was a sales manager, and filled out the column of “Whether there is a dispute in a lawsuit case or a judgment” in the registration form in the “no”, but in fact the employee and the former employer did have a labor dispute. The court held that the concealment of the existence of a labor dispute lawsuit with his former employer was not linked to the fulfillment of the labor contract, and did not constitute fraud in the legal sense.
六、典型案例:上海市三法院分别发布劳动争议相关典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: Three Courts in Shanghai Released Labor Disputes Typical Cases1. 上海市高级人民法院发布“稳定就业”相关的典型案例
Shanghai Higher People’s Court Released Typical Cases Related to Stabilizing Employment2023年12月1日,上海市高级人民法院召开上海法院司法服务保障稳定就业、促进消费新闻发布会,共发布了5个“稳定就业”相关的典型案例,体现出法院通过劳动争议多元解纷机制化解纠纷以及根据事实定分止争的特点。On December 1, 2023, the Shanghai Higher People’s Court held a press conference on the judicial services to ensure stable employment and promote consumption in Shanghai, and released five typical cases related to “stabilizing employment”, reflecting the court’s characteristics of resolving labor disputes through the multiple disputes settlement mechanism, and settling labor disputes based on facts.2. 上海市徐汇区人民法院发布《涉民营企业劳动争议案件审判白皮书》
Shanghai Xuhui District People’s Court Released White Paper on Labor Dispute Cases Involving Private Enterprises2023年12月8日,上海市徐汇区人民法院举行新闻发布会,发布《2018年至2022年涉民营企业劳动争议案件审判白皮书》,包含8起典型案例。我们认为下述案例值得关注:On December 8, 2023, the Shanghai Xuhui District People’s Court held a press conference and released the White Paper on Labor Dispute Cases Involving Private Enterprises from 2018 to 2022, which contained eight typical cases. Among them, we highlight below cases for reference:案例1中,公司在员工报到5日后以不再设立录用通知书中载明的岗位为由拒绝签订劳动合同,法院认定公司违背了诚实信用原则,需按照员工在原公司月工资的1.5倍向员工赔偿经济损失。案例8中,员工离职后未与公司妥善解决尚未完成的工作事宜,不符合诚信履约的法律原则,有违社会主义核心价值观,员工意识到行为不当后和公司达成调解协议。In the Case I, the employer refused to sign the labor contract on the grounds that job position set out in the offer letter would no longer be existed five days after the employee started work. The court found that the employer had violated the principle of good faith, and was required to compensate the employee for the economic loss in accordance with 1.5 times the employee’s monthly salary in the previous employer. In the Case IIX, the employee departed from the employer and did not properly handle the pending work matters with the employer, which was not in line with the legal principle of good faith, violated the core socialist values. The employee realized the misconduct and reached a mediation agreement the employer.3. 上海市奉贤区人民法院发布《劳动争议审判执行案件白皮书》Shanghai Fengxian District People’s Court Released White Paper on Labor Dispute Trial and Enforcement Cases2023年12月15日,上海市奉贤区人民法院发布《劳动争议审判执行案件白皮书》。其中案例5值得关注,该案例中,员工近五年中先后向不同的用人单位提起十几次仲裁与诉讼,其请求多包含未签劳动合同双倍工资差额,并多次对劳动合同中的签名提出笔迹鉴定后获得非本人所签的鉴定结论。该法院审理时考虑到员工的书写样本中笔迹特征未得到充分反映,因而调取了员工在另案庭审笔录中书写的签名用以鉴定,并认定员工在劳动合同中的签名为本人所签。后员工又提起新的劳动合同纠纷且再次申请鉴定,奉贤法院根据法定代表人和员工关于劳动合同到期时间的聊天记录,未安排进行笔迹鉴定,认定劳动合同的真实性,未支持员工要求双倍工资的主张。On 15 December 2023, Shanghai Fengxian District People’s Court issued a White Paper on Labor Dispute Trial and Enforcement Cases. In Case V of the White Paper, the employee filed over a dozen arbitration and litigation cases in the past five years against different employers, and his requests usually included the difference of double wages for not sign a written labor contract. He had requested the handwriting verification of the signatures repeatedly in the labor contract for many times, and then obtained the identification conclusion that the signatures were not signed by the employee himself. The court taking into account the employee’s handwriting characteristics in the handwriting sample were not fully reflected, and thus accessed to the employee’s signature written in the transcripts of other trials for identification, and found that the employee’s signature in the labor contract was signed by himself. Thereafter the employee filed a new labor contract dispute and applied for handwriting verification again, Fengxian Court did not arrange the handwriting verification, but confirmed the authenticity of the labor contract, and did not support the employee’s claim for the difference of double wages based on the chat records between the legal representative and the employee about the expiration time of the labor contract.
七、典型案例:北京市东城区人民法院发布两批劳动用工相关典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: Beijing Dongcheng District People’s Court Released Two Batches of Typical Cases Related to Labor and Employment
1. 北京市东城区人民法院(“东城法院”)发布能动司法审理劳动争议典型案例
Beijing Dongcheng District People’s Court (“Dongcheng Court”) Released Typical Cases of Active Judicial Trial of Labor Disputes2023年11月11日,东城法院发布能动司法审理劳动争议典型案例。典型案例裁审观点如下:On 11 November 2023, Dongcheng Court issued typical cases of active judicial trial of labor disputes. The judicial views are as follows:a. 员工在职期间将公司的客户信息共享给竞争者,法院认定在劳动合同履行期间劳动者负有保密义务,用人单位约定在职期间的保密违约金不违反法律规定,就双方约定的30万元违约金,法院综合考虑被告的违约行为、收入水平、过错程度及损失情况,酌减至4万元。The employee shared the employer’s customer information with a competitor of the employer. The court held that the employee had a duty of confidentiality during the performance of the employment contract, and that the employer’s agreement on liquidated damages for confidentiality duty during his employment did not violate the laws and regulations. With regard to the liquidated damages of 300,000 RMB agreed by both parties, the court reduced the amount to 40,000 RMB at its discretion, taking into account the employee’s default behavior, level of income, degree of fault and damages.b. 员工两次以生病为由申请病假后旅游,旅游中拍摄的跳跃照片也与病情相悖,该行为既有违诚信也有违职业操守,公司解除劳动合同合法。The employee applied for sick leave on the grounds of illness and then traveled twice, and the jumping photos taken during the travel did not correspond to his body condition, which was against both integrity and professional conduct, therefore the eployer terminated the employment contract legally.c. 员工因父亲病危请假,请假当日回家照顾其父亲,并于假期内提供了父亲病历照片,但未获批,公司以员工构成旷工为由解除劳动合同。法院认为公司未体现出以人为本的发展理念,与社会主义核心价值观中友善的要求不符,亦有悖中华民族的传统孝文化,既不合情也不合理,属于违法解除。The employee took a leave of absence due to his father’s critical illness, went home to take care of his father, and provided photos of his father’s medical records during the leave, but the employer did not approve and terminated the employment contract on the grounds that the employee was absent from work. The court held that the employer failed to follow the concept of people-oriented development, and was inconsistent with the requirement of friendliness in the socialist core values and contrary to the traditional filial piety culture of the Chinese, was neither reasonable nor sensible, and it shall be deemed as illegal termination of the employment contract.2. 东城法院发布《雇主责任保险案件审判白皮书》
Dongcheng Court Releases White Paper on Trial of Employers’ Liability Insurance Cases2023年12月29日,东城法院召开新闻发布会发布了《雇主责任保险案件审判白皮书(2020-2023年)》。该《白皮书》的典型案例1中,保险公司以伤者不符合保险条款中载明的“雇员”定义,伤者与用工单位是劳务关系而非劳动关系拒赔,法院审理认为雇主责任保险中的“雇佣关系”不应特指劳动关系,雇主与雇员的概念也不应特指劳动关系中的用人单位和劳动者,判决保险公司赔偿。On December 29, 2023, Dongcheng Court held a press conference to release the White Paper on Trial of Employers’ Liability Insurance Cases (2020-2023). In the Case I of the White Paper, the insurance company refused to pay compensation on the grounds that the injured person did not meet the definition of “employee” set forth in the insurance policy, and that the injured person and the employer were in a service relationship rather than an employment relationship. The court held that the “relationship” in the employer’s liability insurance should not specifically refer to the employment relationship, and the concept of enterprise and worker should not specifically refer to the employer and employee in the employment relationship, and awarded compensation to the insurance company.目前的非劳动关系用工实践中,企业通常通过雇主责任险防范和控制用工风险。法院的审理口径明确雇主责任保险中的“雇佣关系”不应特指劳动关系,应做广义解释,和雇主责任险的定位一致。In the current practice of engagement in non-labor relationship, enterprises usually prevent and control the risk of employment through employer’s liability insurance. The court’s decision made it clear that the “relationship” in the employer’s liability insurance should not refer to the labor relationship in particular, but should be interpreted in a broader sense, which is consistent with the goals of the employer’s liability insurance.