news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

original title: an employee's salary was deducted by 240,000 yuan because the company believed he was suspected of committing a crime (topic)

the company claimed that the salary deduction was due to problems with the project the employee was responsible for, but because it did not provide sufficient evidence, the court "did not support" (subtitle)

workers' daily-china workers' network reporter lai zhikai

reading tips

in judicial practice, when a dispute arises between two parties in a labor relationship regarding wage deduction, who should bear the burden of proof? can an employer punish an employee by deducting his or her wages? if wages are deducted, how should an employee protect his or her legal rights and interests?

when the company "temporarily withheld" his salary on the grounds that li qing might cause losses to the company or even bear criminal responsibility, he believed that the company's practice violated his legal rights and interests, so he resigned and asked the company to return the unpaid salary according to the agreed salary standard. upon investigation, it was found that until the court heard the case, the company's claim that li qing was suspected of economic crimes had not yet been filed.

the court held that, if the company could not prove that its reason for "temporarily withholding" li qing's salary was real, li qing's claim should be accepted. on august 2, the beijing second intermediate people's court ordered the company to return li qing's outstanding salary of more than 240,000 yuan.

is there any fact of wage arrears?

in march 2021, li qing signed a labor contract with a beijing service company for a period from march 25, 2021 to march 24, 2024, stipulating that his job position was deputy general manager of the department. on march 16, 2022, he submitted his resignation to the company, citing that his salary and year-end salary equivalent to 30% of his annual salary had been withheld for four consecutive months without reason since november 2021.

in response to li qing's claims and requests when applying for labor arbitration, the company said that it did not owe wages. to this end, the company submitted the staff salary grading standards and calculation structure to prove that li qing's annual basic income was 489,600 yuan, of which basic salary accounted for 80% and year-end performance bonus accounted for 20%. li qing said that the evidence was made by the company and he had never seen it during his employment. his salary standard and payment situation was a fixed annual salary of 580,000 yuan, of which 70% was paid monthly and the remaining 30% was paid in one lump sum at the end of the year.

the company submitted the "salary and welfare management measures" to prove that li qing's performance-based remuneration is closely linked to the company's benefits and his personal work performance, and the company has the right to decide on the payment of performance-based remuneration based on the assessment results. in the performance ranking of department heads submitted by the company, li qing's performance score for 2021 was 75.77 points, with a grade of d. li qing stated that the company's so-called assessment had no specific standards and procedures, nor was it confirmed by the person being assessed. the company stated that it was inconvenient to display the assessment documents because they might involve criminal issues, but it guaranteed that its assessment process and results were fair and objective. however, the company did not present specific rules and regulations that performance wages would not be paid if the assessment result was grade d.

the statements before and after the trial are inconsistent

to prove his claim, li qing submitted bank transaction details to prove that the wage income paid by the company included monthly wages, subsidies, benefits, and bonuses. since november 2021, the company has deducted his wages for no reason, and only paid him 2,320 yuan per month from december 2021 to march 2022, and did not pay any wages in april 2022, which means that the company failed to pay labor remuneration in full and on time.

after trial, the arbitration institution ruled that li qing had a labor relationship with the company from march 25, 2021 to april 9, 2022, and the company should pay li qing the difference in salary of more than 240,000 yuan, and rejected li qing's other applications. the company was dissatisfied with the ruling and filed a lawsuit with the xicheng district people's court of beijing.

during the trial, li qing stated that the salary list submitted by the company to the arbitration institution after the labor arbitration hearing was inconsistent with the salary standards and payment arrangements of li qing stated in the arbitration hearing, and there was a possibility of lying, so he requested the court to dismiss the company's lawsuit.

"there are two controversial points in this case. one is that the two parties disagree on li qing's salary standard and the ratio of monthly payment to year-end payment. the other is that the company claims that li qing's salary should be withheld because the project he is in charge of may involve criminal issues and he needs to cooperate in the investigation," said wu lijun, a member of the beijing federation of trade unions' model worker legal service team and a lawyer at beijing qianjun law firm. during the lawsuit, the court and the company contacted the economic crime investigation department of the public security agency, but neither of them obtained information that the project in charge of li qing was filed as a criminal case.

the court of first instance held that the evidence submitted by li qing was more effective than the evidence submitted by the company, and accepted his defense that the annual salary was 580,000 yuan, 70% of which was paid on weekdays and 30% was paid in a lump sum at the end of the year. the company should pay li qing the difference in wages from march 25, 2021 to april 9, 2022 according to this standard. the court did not support the company's lawsuit because it lacked factual and legal basis. accordingly, the court of first instance ruled that the two parties had a labor relationship during the corresponding period and that the company should pay li qing the difference in wages of 241,142.20 yuan from march 25, 2021 to april 9, 2022.

do not punish employees by withholding their wages

the company appealed the judgment. the second-instance court held that the company claimed that li qing’s salary was deducted due to problems with the project, but the evidence submitted was not sufficient to prove the facts it claimed. the company claimed that li qing was not entitled to performance compensation because his performance did not meet the standards, but the "annual performance responsibility letter of the department head" submitted by the company did not specify the relationship between performance completion and performance compensation, nor did it fully explain the specific circumstances such as the basis and process of the assessment. in the end, the court ruled to dismiss the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

"employers should deduct wages only on the premise that employees have committed intent or gross negligence and have caused damage to the company. they cannot simply deduct wages on the grounds that losses may be caused or criminal liability needs to be borne. the principle of legality of crime and punishment is one of the basic principles of my country's criminal law. criminal liability is the punishment imposed by the court on employees' criminal behavior in accordance with the law. employers have no right to punish employees by deducting wages." wu lijun said in an interview with reporters that employers are advised to handle the matter of deducting employees' wages with caution.

article 11 of the beijing wage payment regulations clearly stipulates that employers shall not deduct workers' wages at will. except for matters stipulated by laws, regulations, and rules, employers' deductions of workers' wages shall comply with the provisions of collective contracts, labor contracts, or the rules and regulations of the unit. in judicial practice, employers' deductions of wages should be based on facts that have already occurred or have been determined. when the two parties have a dispute over wage deductions, the employer has the obligation to provide sufficient evidence to prove the legality of the wage deduction. when the employer cannot provide evidence or the evidence is insufficient, it needs to bear the corresponding adverse consequences. (li qing is a pseudonym to protect the privacy of employees)