Text/Tuyang City reporter Zheng Da Correspondent Zhang Mengying Lin Bina
Ms. Zhuhai Fan joined a property company for less than two months, but was fired on the day of pregnancy.After repeated negotiation with the property company, Ms. Fan filed a lawsuit on the grounds of equal employment disputes on April 25 this year.Recently, the Zhuhai Xiangzhou Court made a first -instance judgment on the case, determining that the property company infringed Ms. Fan’s equal employment rights, or ordered her to apologize to Ms. Fan in writing.The damage is 10,000 yuan.It is reported that the case is the first judicial practice in Guangdong Province.
Trial site
Reasons: Women’s employment was fired by the company for 45 days of employment
On January 5, 2019, Ms. Fan joined a property company and served as a property management monitor of a school in Zhuhai. The monthly salary was 3750 yuan, and the working hours were second -class system (from 7 to 19 o’clock, 19 o’clock in the evening shift to 7 the next day,), The two sides did not sign a written labor contract.Nine days later, Ms. Fan resigned to the property company. During the Spring Festival, the man was nervous and the property company did not agree.At more than 8 o’clock on the morning of February 20th, Ms. Fan found that she was pregnant at home pregnancy inspection sticks. She felt uncomfortable to go to the hospital for medical treatment and called the manager Du to ask for leave.Concerned through WeChat for a while.At 4 o’clock in the afternoon, the squad leader Lin called him not to go to work anymore.The hospital was diagnosed with Ms. Fan’s pregnancy and made a day of rest.The next day, the property company rejected Ms. Fan into the workplace.On February 23, Ms. Fan mailed the "Notice of Requesting to Continue to Perform Labor Relations" to the property company, requiring her to continue to perform labor relations and respect women’s work rights. The property company did not respond after signing.On March 30, Ms. Fan missed naturally.Ms. Fan believes that after learning that she is pregnant, the property company is not based on the needs of the job. The behavior of dismissal has seriously violated her equal employment rights, causing her mental depression, insomnia, low mood, and painfulness.Great mental damage.The behavior of the property company violated the regulations of citizens’ equal employment rights and women’s special protection during the menstrual, pregnancy, yield, and lactation during their laws.According to Article 62 of the Employment Promotion Law, Article 52 of the Women’s Rights Protection Law, and "Implementation Measures for the Implementation of the Labor Protection of Women’s Workers in Guangdong Province", a lawsuit shall be filed to request the court to order the property company to compensate for the salary during pregnancy during pregnancy.Economic losses of 4784 yuan, wages and economy losses of 1875 yuan for maternity leave, 1,875 yuan, maternity medical expenses that failed to enjoy medical insurance benefits were 1949.22 yuan, mental damage consolation was 30,000 yuan, and apologies were apologized to it.
Disputes: Infringement disputes or labor disputes?Does it constitute "employment discrimination"?
The property company argued that first, the dispute between the two parties was a labor dispute.Prosecution.Second, the first three compensation content of Ms. Fan’s demands is that the property company has caused a labor dispute with the property company, and is not a dispute between personality rights (equal employment).Labor disputes should be arbitrated before. Ms. Fan requires that the property company requires the property company to pay the wage loss during pregnancy without arbitration, the loss of maternity losses of maternity leave, and the failure to enjoy the payment of medical insurance benefits.Third, the reason why the property company and Ms. Fan terminated the labor relationship were not her pregnancy, but because Ms. Fan often arrived late and leave early during the probation period, seriously violated the rules and regulations of the property company, and did not meet the requirements of the hiring conditions.Ms. Fan herself also verbally put forward the intention of leaving.According to Article 39 of the Labor Law, the relationship between property companies and Ms. Fan’s termination of labor contracts does not violate the law and does not need to assume the responsibility of lift the labor contract illegal.During the trial, Ms. Fan had no objection to the late facts, but she believed that being late was acquiescence by the manager of the property company, because her home was far from the work place, and the property company had always been acquiescence on employees, and never deducted her salary due to being late.The property company also confirmed that in January and February 2019, they did not deduct Ms. Fan’s salary due to being late.
Judgment: It is determined that the company infringes the equal employment rights of female workers.
After hearing, the Xiangzhou Court held that the case was a matter of labor dispute disputes that should be pre -arbitral.Article 62 of the "Employment Promotion Law of the People’s Republic of China" stipulates that if the provisions of this Law are violated and employment discrimination is implemented, the workers can file a lawsuit with the people’s court.Ms. Fan advocates that their equal employment rights have been violated by the property company, and claims to claim damage compensation in accordance with the provisions, and her claims are not overlapped with the arbitration request proposed in the arbitration case. ThereforeDisputes shall not be adopted for the reasons for the pre -arbitral pre -defense.
Regarding whether the property company infringes Ms. Fan’s equal employment rights.The existing evidence is enough to prove that the property company’s dismissal of Ms. Fan was to learn that Ms. Fan was pregnant.Although Ms. Fan had a late behavior and resigned before pregnancy, the property company did not agree to resign and did not punish her late behavior. However, after knowing that Ms. Fan was pregnant, she immediately fired it.The reason is that he is pregnant.According to Article 3 and 27 of the "Employment Promotion Law of the People’s Republic of China", Article 26 of the Women’s Rights Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China stipulates the scope of the protection of equal employment rights protectionThere should be two aspects. One is the right to be hired equally during the recruitment process, and the other is that the rights of workers are treated equally during the performance of the labor contract.In this case, although Ms. Fan was not treated discriminatoryly when she was in office, the property company dismissed her because of her pregnancy during the performance of the labor contract.Ms. Fan’s discrimination treatment still constitutes an infringement of Ms. Fan’s equal employment rights.
The case is a complaint of infringement. Ms. Fan claimed that the loss of wages during pregnancy, maternal holidays, and maternity medical expenses were the economic losses that had occurred after their equal employment rights were infringed. They could deal with the infringement case without labor arbitration procedures.The court finally ordered the property company to apologize to Ms. Fan in writing, and compensated the salary loss of 2064 yuan during pregnancy, 1875 yuan for unparalleled leave wages, and 10,000 yuan in mental damage.
At present, the case is still in the appeal period, and the first trial has not yet taken effect.
Source | Yangcheng School
Responsible editor | Feng Xiaojing
Trial | Wei Liyuan
Intern | Zhan Yaqi
