新規(guī)速遞：廣東省印發(fā)“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”三個規(guī)則；浙江省發(fā)布《浙江省生育保險辦法》
Quick View of New Regulations: Guangdong Released Three Regulations Regarding Arbitrations on Internet Platforms; Zhejiang Released the Provisions of Zhejiang on Maternity Insurance
Exploration of Typical Cases: Nine Labor Dispute Cases Added to the People's Court Case Database典型案例：全國總工會、上海市發(fā)布涉勞動爭議典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: All-China Federation of Trade Unions and Shanghai Released Typical Labor Dispute Cases
典型案例：北京市發(fā)布涉多元用工勞動爭議典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: Beijing Released Typical Labor Disputes Concerning Diversified Employment Models典型案例：四川高院等三部門發(fā)布勞動爭議案件典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: Sichuan High Court and Three Departments Released Typical Labor Dispute Cases
一、新規(guī)速遞：廣東省印發(fā)“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”三個規(guī)則；浙江省發(fā)布《浙江省生育保險辦法》
Quick View of New Regulations: Guangdong Released Three Regulations Regarding Arbitrations on Internet Platforms; Zhejiang Released the Provisions of Zhejiang on Maternity Insurance
1. 廣東省印發(fā)“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”三個規(guī)則
Guangdong Released Three Regulations Regarding Arbitrations on Internet Platforms2024年7月19日，廣東省勞動人事爭議仲裁委員會印發(fā)《“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”在線庭審規(guī)則（試行）》《“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”異步審理規(guī)則（試行）》《“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”電子勞動合同爭議處理規(guī)則（試行）》等三個規(guī)則（“三個規(guī)則”）。三個規(guī)則針對“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”活動中的身份認證、異步審理機制、在線仲裁庭設置、電子勞動合同證據(jù)規(guī)則、電子送達、電子卷宗等前沿問題，明確了核心環(huán)節(jié)的法律效力和審核規(guī)則，劃定了相關程序的適用邊界，并就維護數(shù)據(jù)信息安全、確保技術(shù)中立和平臺中立提出要求，對于規(guī)范“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+仲裁”流程、提升庭審效率、促進新技術(shù)與仲裁庭審程序融合發(fā)展具有積極意義。On July 19, 2024, Guangdong Labor and Personnel Dispute Arbitration Committee released three regulations regarding arbitrations on Internet platforms, including Regulations on Online Hearing (Trial), Regulations on Online Asynchronous Hearing (Trial) and Regulations on Electronic Labor Contract Disputes Settlement (Trial) (“Three Rules”). Three Rules focus on frontline issues in arbitrations on Internet platforms, such as identity authentication, asynchronous hearing procedure, online arbitration tribunal arrangement, rules of evidence for electronic labor contracts, electronic mode of service, electronic documentation, etc.. Three Rules clarify the legal effect and audit rules of the key steps, define the application scope of the procedures, and clarify the requirements on protection of data and information, assurance the neutrality of technology and platform, which are of positive significance for standardizing the process of arbitrations at Internet platforms, enhancing the efficiency of hearings, and promoting the development of new technologies and arbitration procedures.
2. 浙江省發(fā)布《浙江省生育保險辦法》
Zhejiang Released the Provisions of Zhejiang on Maternity Insurance2024年7月1日，浙江省人民政府網(wǎng)站發(fā)布《浙江省生育保險辦法》（“《辦法》”）。《辦法》明確：（1）參加職工基本醫(yī)療保險的在職職工（含靈活就業(yè)人員）、領取失業(yè)保險金人員同步參加生育保險；（2）生育保險待遇包括生育醫(yī)療費用和產(chǎn)假期間的生育津貼，確保待遇水平不低于當?shù)芈毠せ踞t(yī)療保險待遇水平；（3）職工申領生育津貼待遇時未在參保地連續(xù)繳費滿6個月的可根據(jù)實際待其繳費滿6個月后，進行回溯支付；（4）生育津貼按照職工生育或者終止妊娠時所在用人單位上年度職工月平均工資除以30天，再乘以應當享受的產(chǎn)假天數(shù)計發(fā)。On July 1, 2024, the website of the People’s Government of Zhejiang Province released the Provisions of Zhejiang on Maternity Insurance (“Provisions”). The Provisions clarify that: (1) active employees (including flexibly workers) who participate in the employee basic medical insurance and those who entitle to unemployment insurance treatments shall participate in maternity insurance simultaneously; (2) maternity insurance treatments shall include maternity medical expenses and maternity allowances during the maternity leave period, and the treatment level shall not be lower than the level of the local employee basic medical insurance; (3) if an employee does not have 6 months of continuous contributions in the place where he/she participates in the insurance when he/she applies for the maternity allowance treatments, the maternity insurance treatments can be applied and retroactively paid after 6 months of continuous contributions; and (4) the maternity allowance shall be calculated based on the average monthly wage of all staffs of employee’s employer when giving birth or terminating a pregnancy (which shall be divided by 30 days and multiple by the number of maternity leave days).Exploration of Typical Cases: Nine Labor Dispute Cases Added to the People's Court Case Database自人民法院案例庫（“案例庫”）上線并向社會開放以來，已收錄50件勞動爭議案件，其中9件于2024年8月新收錄入庫。新入庫的9件勞動爭議案例主要涉及勞動關系認定、競業(yè)限制、勞動關系解除的責任承擔等多個方面。就其中包含的裁審典型觀點，我們梳理如下：Since the Peoples Court Case Database (“Case Database”) was officially online and accessible to society, 50 labor dispute cases have been recorded, including 9 new cases added in August 2024. These newly added cases mainly involve the identification of employment relationship, non-compete restriction, and the responsibilities upon the termination of employment relationship. We summarize the key judicial perspectives from these new cases as follows:
1. 4件案例涉及確認勞動關系，認定的核心為人格、經(jīng)濟及組織從屬性。
Four cases involve the confirmation of employment relationship, with the core focus on personal, economic, and organizational subordination.在某高纖公司訴崔某案中，法院根據(jù)生產(chǎn)線員工的工作內(nèi)容、報酬領取方式以及對規(guī)章制度的遵守情況，認定該員工與公司之間存在從屬性，用人單位不能通過簽訂承包合同來規(guī)避勞動關系的成立。在圣某訴某網(wǎng)絡科技公司案中，雖然勞動者登記為個體工商戶，但因其需接受平臺用工合作企業(yè)的實質(zhì)管理，且報酬由平臺用工合作企業(yè)確定和支付，法院判定雙方存在勞動關系。In the case of High Fiber Company v. Mr. Cui, the court determined that there was an subordination between the employee and the employer based on the nature of the work performed by the employee, the method of remuneration, and compliance with employer’ rules and regulations, and held that the employer could not circumvent the establishment of employment relationship by signing an outsourcing agreement. In the case of Mr. Sheng v. Technology Company, the court ruled that although Mr. Sheng was registered as an individual entrepreneur, the fact that he was under substantial management by the platform’ partner, Technology Company, and that remuneration was determined and paid by the Technology Company indicated an employment relationship.但在王某訴某文化傳媒公司案件中，法院認定該網(wǎng)絡主播與經(jīng)紀公司之間不存在勞動法意義上的從屬性；秦某訴某汽車公司案件中，亦認定該代駕司機與平臺企業(yè)不存在勞動法意義上的支配性用工和勞動管理，不構(gòu)成勞動關系。However, in the case of Mr. Wang v. Cultural Media Company, the court found that the network streamer was not subject to the subordination typically associated with an employment relationship under labor law. Similarly, in the case of Mr. Qin v. Automobile Company, the court ruled that Mr. Qin, a driver providing online appointment chauffeur services, was not subject to the control and management associated with an employment relationship under labor law, and thus, no employment relationship was established.
2. 2件案例涉及競業(yè)限制違約行為的認定。
Two cases involve the determination of breach of non-compete obligation.某生物公司訴李某案件中，法院指出，競業(yè)限制協(xié)議不能限制非負有保密義務勞動者的自主擇業(yè)權(quán)。員工李某的崗位為推拿師，法院認定該員工不屬于“高級管理人員”和“高級技術(shù)人員”，其掌握的客戶資料、報價方案以及培訓課程等信息屬于用人單位的一般經(jīng)營信息，亦不屬于“其他負有保密義務人員”。In the case of Biotechnology Company v. Mr. Li, the court emphasized that a non-compete agreement cannot restrict the right of employees who do not have confidentiality obligations to independently choose their career. Mr. Li as a massage therapist was found not to fall under the categories of “senior manager” or “senior technical personnel”. The information Mr. Li had access to, such as client lists, pricing schemes, and training courses, was deemed general business information of the employer, not classified as confidential.張某訴某體育公司案件中，法院認定勞動者在競業(yè)限制期通過配偶投資經(jīng)營與原用人單位存在競爭關系的企業(yè)，屬于違反競業(yè)限制的行為。In the case of Mr. Zhang v. Sports Company, the court ruled that Mr. Zhang violated the non-compete obligation by investing through his spouse in a business that competed with his former employer during the non-compete period.
3. 3件案例涉及勞動關系的訂立及解除問題。
Three cases involve the establishment and termination of employment relationship.
● 費某訴某人力資源公司案件中，費某為該公司員工的配偶，該公司簽訂雖與費某簽署勞務合同，但費某并未提供實際勞動，法院認定未建立真實勞動關系不能享受社會保險待遇。In the case of Mrs. Fei v. Human Resources Company, Mrs. Fei is the spouse of an employee of the HR Company who signed a service contract with the HR Company but did not perform any actual work. The court ruled that there was no real employment relationship was established and that Mrs. Fei was not entitled to social insurance benefits.● 郭某等訴某科技公司案件中，法院綜合企業(yè)資金運轉(zhuǎn)困難及勞動和合法權(quán)益及時兌現(xiàn)等事項，通過組織達成用人單位分期履行因解除勞動合同而達成的欠付工資和經(jīng)濟補償金協(xié)議的調(diào)解方案。In the case of Mr. Guo. v. Technology Company, the court mediated an agreement allowing employer to pay overdue wages and economic compensation in installments due to financial difficulties, ensuring the protection of employees’ legal rights and interests.● 某科技公司訴李某案件中，研發(fā)人員李某未提前三十日通知公司即自行離職，且辭職后拒不交接工作，用人單位通過啟用備用方案、招聘人員、委托設計等措施補救，且因延誤向第三方承擔了違約責任。法院認定勞動者給用人單位造成損失，應當承擔損失賠償責任，綜合考量研發(fā)時間、離職時間、員工工資等因素酌定賠償5萬元。In the case of Technology Company v. Mr. Li, Mr. Li, as a R & D personnel resigned without giving 30 days’ notice, refused to hand over work and caused the employer to incur breach of contract penalties due to delays. The court held that Mr. Li was liable for the employer’s damages, and awarded damages of RMB 50,000, considering the development time, resignation date, and the employee’s salary.
三、典型案例：全國總工會、上海市發(fā)布涉勞動爭議典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: All-China Federation of Trade Unions and Shanghai Released Typical Labor Dispute Cases2024年8月19日至20日，全國總工會發(fā)布了全國工會職工法律援助十大典型案例，涵蓋追討欠薪、工亡賠償、違法解除勞動合同、新就業(yè)形態(tài)勞動者權(quán)益保障等多個方面。其中，以下裁審觀點值得重點關注：From August 19 to 20, 2024, the All-China Federation of Trade Unions released the Ten Typical Cases of Legal Aid Provided by Trade Unions for Employees, covering issues such as wage arrears, compensation for work-related death, unlawful termination of employment contracts, and the protection of legal rights and interests of workers in new forms of employment. The following judicial opinions are particularly noteworthy:
1. 鄭某入職某農(nóng)產(chǎn)品銷售公司從事主播工作，公司以經(jīng)營困難為由通知員工停止上班。仲裁裁決采納了工會為該員工安排的法律援助律師的意見，認為公司具有用人單位主體資格，鄭某服從公司工作安排且鄭某工作內(nèi)容符合公司業(yè)務范圍，存在勞動關系。
Mr. Zheng joined an Agricultural Product Sales Company as a livestream host, and the employer notified employees to stop working due to production and operation difficulties. The arbitration award adopted the opinion of the legal aid lawyer arranged by the trade union for Mr. Zheng, determining that the Company had the status of an employer, that Mr. Zheng complied with the Company’s work arrangements, and that his job duties fell within the scope of the Company’s business, thus confirming the existence of an employment relationship.
2. 從事外賣工作的解某在送餐途中突發(fā)疾病搶救無效死亡。法院采納了工會為該員工安排的法律援助工作者的意見，認定公司具有用人單位主體資格，解某根據(jù)公司要求進行上崗前培訓、打卡考勤，并通過公司APP接收訂單，配備統(tǒng)一服飾及配送箱開展配送業(yè)務，以計件提成方式支付薪酬，符合一般勞動關系特征，判決認定存在勞動關系。
Mr. Xie, who worked as a food deliveryman, suddenly fell ill and died while delivering an order. The court accepted the opinion of the legal aid counsel provided by the trade union and recognized that the Company had the status of an employer, that Mr. Xie had received pre-employment training, clocked in for attendance, received orders via the Company’s APP, wore a uniform, and used a company-provided delivery box to carry out his works, receiving remuneration based on a piece-rate system. These factors met the characteristics of a general employment relationship, and the court ruled that an employment relationship existed.
2024年7月2日，上海市嘉定區(qū)人民法院發(fā)布《上海法院數(shù)字經(jīng)濟司法研究及實踐（嘉定）基地白皮書》，并發(fā)布了十大典型案例。在“涉平臺經(jīng)營者法定義務及相關主體權(quán)益保護的案件”部分，以下裁審觀點值得重點關注：On July 2, 2024, the Jiading District People’s Court of Shanghai released the White Paper on Judicial Research and Practice in the Digital Economy by Shanghai Courts (Jiading Base) and announced ten typical cases. In the section on “Cases Involving the Statutory Duties of Platform Operators and the Protection of Related Subjects’ Rights and Interests”, the following judicial opinions are noteworthy:
3. 運輸公司和平臺科技公司簽訂《共享經(jīng)濟客戶服務協(xié)議》，劉某與平臺科技公司簽訂了《共享經(jīng)濟合作伙伴協(xié)議》，明確劉某是平臺科技公司為運輸公司匹配的個體工商業(yè)者，不構(gòu)成勞動或勞務關系。法院認為，因劉某由運輸公司進行管理，具有較弱的人身依附性；劉某的報酬實質(zhì)由運輸公司支付，具有一定經(jīng)濟從屬性，判決運輸公司與劉某構(gòu)成勞務關系。因平臺科技公司和劉某不構(gòu)成勞務關系，對劉某事故也不存在過錯，判決運輸公司需對提供勞務時受傷所致的合理損失中承擔5萬元的賠償責任。
A Transport Company and a Platform Company signed a “Shared Economy Service Agreement”, Mr. Liu and the Platform Company signed a “Shared Economy Partner Agreement”, clearly stating that Mr. Liu was an individual entrepreneur matched by the Platform Company to the Transport Company, and that no employment or service relationship was established. Given that Mr. Liu was managed by the Transport Company, he had weak personal dependency; his remuneration was essentially paid by the Transport Company, demonstrating a certain level of economic subordination, the court ruled that a service relationship existed between the Transport Company and Mr. Liu. Since there was no service relationship between the Platform Company and Mr. Liu, and the Platform Company was not at fault in Mr. Liu’s accident, the court ordered the Transport Company to bear RMB 50,000 as compensation for the reasonable losses incurred in provision of services.
4. 王某在傳媒公司提供的直播場地，利用公司提供的設備從事娛樂主播，并因此獲取打賞收益。法院認定，王某的工作內(nèi)容屬于傳媒公司的業(yè)務組成部分，收益分配方式上符合勞動關系中按月支付勞動報酬的特征，且王某服從傳媒公司的日常管理等，判決確認王某與傳媒公司之間存在勞動關系。
Mr. Wang worked as an entertainment host at a livestreaming venue provided by a Media Company, using equipment supplied by the Company, and earned tips as a result. The court found that Mr. Wang’s job duties were part of the Media Company’s business production and operation, that the revenue-sharing model aligned with the characteristic of monthly wage payments in an employment relationship, and that Mr. Wang was subject to the daily management of the Media Company. The court ruled that an employment relationship existed between Mr. Wang and the Media Company.
四、典型案例：北京市發(fā)布涉多元用工勞動爭議典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: Beijing Released Typical Labor Disputes Concerning Diversified Employment Models2024年7月9日，北京市朝陽區(qū)人民法院發(fā)布了7起涉多元用工勞動爭議典型案例，涉及企業(yè)間混同用工的責任承擔、眾包用工中舉證責任分配、平臺用工糾紛調(diào)處舉措等。其中，以下裁審觀點值得重點關注：On July 9, 2024, Beijing Chaoyang District People’s Court released seven typical cases of labor disputes concerning diversified employment models, involving the responsibility for mixed employment between enterprises, the burden of proof in crowdsourcing employment, and mediation of disputes on employment through platforms. Among them, the following judicial opinions are noteworthy:
1. 在認定用人單位是否存在混同用工情形時，應從事實勞動過程出發(fā)，從勞動者與不同單位間體現(xiàn)的依附性與從屬性等角度進行綜合判斷，對于確實存在混同用工情形的，應在尊重當事人意思的前提下，判令多個用工主體承擔連帶責任。
To determine whether there is mixed employment among the employers, it shall be comprehensively judged based on the actual labor process, and from the subordination shown between the worker and different employer. And if it turns out that there is mixed employment, the multiple employers shall be determined to bear joint and several liabilities as claimed by the employee.
2. 用工單位以經(jīng)營困難為由退回派遣員工不符合勞動法下可以退回的法定情形，構(gòu)成違法退回；派遣單位在此情形下不加核實直接解除與派遣員工的勞動關系，屬于違法解除，派遣單位應與用工單位共同承擔賠償責任。
Return of a dispatched employee due to difficulty of business operation does not comply with the statutory grounds, and shall constitute a wrongful return. In that case, if the labor dispatch service provider directly terminates the labor relationship with the employee without any verification, it shall be deemed as a wrongful termination, and the labor dispatch service provider and the end user shall be jointly liable for the compensation.
3. 用人單位從平臺承包配送業(yè)務后實際負責配送運營管理工作的，不得僅以存在“外包合同”后再次轉(zhuǎn)包為由，否認與勞動者之間存在勞動關系。
For the employer in charge of the operation and management of the distribution business after contracting such business from the platform, the employer shall not deny the labor relationship with the workers merely based on the argument that such business is subcontracted again.
4. 用人單位通過設立關聯(lián)企業(yè)，與勞動者簽訂勞動合同時交替變換合同主體的行為，存在規(guī)避勞動合同法第十四條的情形，工作年限和訂立固定期限勞動合同的次數(shù)仍應連續(xù)計算，用人單位應與員工訂立無固定期限勞動合同。
If an employer establishes an affiliated enterprise and changes the subject of the labor contract with employees to the affiliated enterprise, it shall be deemed as a circumvention of statutory obligations. In this case, the employee’s service year and the number of times of entering into fixed-term labor contracts shall be calculated consecutively, and the employer shall enter into an open-ended labor contract with the employee.
5. 派遣單位與用工單位未為符合條件的員工繳納住房公積金的特定事項的責任承擔問題達成明確約定而產(chǎn)生糾紛時，應結(jié)合《民法典》的規(guī)定以及雙方過錯程度，確定派遣單位和用工單位應當承擔的責任。If any dispute arises due to lack of clear agreement between the labor dispatch service provider and the end user on specific matters such as bearing of housing fund contributions for eligible employees, the liability of the labor dispatch service provider and the end user shall be determined based on the degree of fault of the two parties according to the Civil Code.五、典型案例：四川高院等三部門發(fā)布勞動爭議案件典型案例
Exploration of Typical Cases: Sichuan High Court and Three Departments Released Typical Labor Dispute Cases2024年7月12日，四川高院、省司法廳、省人力資源社會保障廳共同召開“行政審判樹優(yōu)提質(zhì)”活動首場院廳聯(lián)席會，聯(lián)合發(fā)布“人力資源社會保障行政執(zhí)法、行政復議、行政審判典型案例”。其中，以下裁審觀點值得重點關注：On July 12, 2024, the Sichuan High Court and three departments held the first joint meeting of the “Administrative Trial Quality Improvement” campaign and jointly released “Typical Cases of Administrative Law Enforcement, Administrative Reconsideration, and Administrative Trials in Human Resources and Social Security”. The following judicial opinions are particularly noteworthy:1. 工傷職工對勞動能力初次鑒定結(jié)論不服的法定救濟渠道是向省級勞動能力鑒定委員會申請再次鑒定，而非行政訴訟。勞動者在工作中受到事故傷害，認定為工傷，傷殘等級鑒定為八級，勞動者不服該鑒定結(jié)論并向法院提起行政訴訟，請求撤銷該鑒定結(jié)論。法院認定勞動能力鑒定委員會不是行政機關，其所作出的勞動能力鑒定是技術(shù)性等級鑒定不是行政行為，不屬于行政訴訟的受案范圍。如對初次鑒定結(jié)論不服的，申請鑒定的單位或者個人可以向省、自治區(qū)、直轄市勞動能力鑒定委員會提出再次鑒定申請。The statutory remedy for work-related injured employee who disagrees with the initial assessment of their labor ability is to apply for a re-assessment by the Provincial Labor Ability Assessment Committee, rather than pursuing an administrative lawsuit. In this case, the employee was injured in a workplace accident, recognized as a work-related injury, and assessed with a disability rating of Grade 8. The employee disagreed with this assessment and filed an administrative lawsuit. The court ruled that the Labor Ability Assessment Committee is not an administrative authority, and the assessment is a technical grade evaluation rather than a specific administrative decision, thus falling outside the scope of administrative litigation. If the initial assessment is disputed, the employer and employee can apply to the Provincial Labor Ability Assessment Committee for a re-assessment.2. 已領取城鎮(zhèn)職工基本養(yǎng)老保險待遇的人員，在招用單位已按建設工程項目參保等方式為其繳納工傷保險費的情況下，也應適用《工傷保險條例》，可以享受工傷保險待遇。Workers receiving basic pension benefits under the basic pension insurance for urban workers remain entitled to work-related injury insurance benefits under the Regulation on Work-Related Injury Insurance, provided that the employer has contributed work-related injury insurance (e.g. through construction project insurance) for them.
