Ruthless Nokia: Employee was fired for absenteeism after attending funeral

Mr. Wan, an employee of Nokia Communication Systems Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. with an open-ended contract, was dismissed for three days of absence after he went home to attend a funeral. Mr. Wan asked the company to pay more than 102,000 yuan in wages for the period of illegal termination of the contract, but the arbitration committee and the court of first instance rejected the request. Yesterday, the Second Intermediate People's Court revised the final judgment and supported Mr. Wan's request.

First instance: The court supported the arbitration committee's ruling against the employee

On May 16, 2012, Nokia sent an email to change Mr. Wan's line manager to Zhang. On August 22, 2012, Zhang notified Mr. Wan by email that he would move to Wangjing the next day. On August 24, Mr. Wan sent an email stating that he was still working in Jiuxianqiao.

On that day, Mr. Wan returned to his hometown in Hunan to deal with the funeral of his mother-in-law, and returned to Beijing on August 28.

On September 5, 2012, the company decided to terminate the employment contract with Mr. Wan on the grounds that he "failed to comply with the instructions of his line manager and was absent from work for more than three consecutive days."

Mr. Wan applied for arbitration in June 2013, demanding that the company continue to perform the contract and pay a total of 102,400 yuan in wages for the illegal termination of the labor contract. The arbitration committee rejected Mr. Wan's request.

Mr. Wan then filed a lawsuit in court. He said that first of all, he believed that Zhang had not been changed to his line manager, and he had doubts about the notice sent by email and verified it with many people, but received no response.

Secondly, after his mother-in-law passed away, he applied for bereavement leave from the company via email before taking leave. The company's leave policy states that employees can enjoy six days of bereavement leave after presenting relevant certificates. He did not know what the relevant certificates were, so he sent emails to ask several relevant persons in charge, but none of them gave a clear response. So he handed over the work to his colleagues and returned to his hometown.

After hearing the case, the court of first instance upheld the arbitration result and ruled that Mr. Wan lost the case. Mr. Wan appealed to the Second Intermediate People's Court of the city.

Second instance: The court changed the verdict to support all the employees’ demands

After hearing the case, the Second Intermediate People's Court of the city held that the focus of the dispute in this case was whether the termination of the labor contract between Nokia and Mr. Wan was legal.

The court held that Nokia only notified Mr. Wan of the personnel change via email. When Mr. Wan found it difficult to confirm and raised questions about the company, the company did not fulfill its effective obligation to inform. Furthermore, since the moving notice issued by Zhang was an electronic scanned copy, Mr. Wan did not implement the moving decision and requested the company to provide a formal written notice, which was not improper.

Before his leave, Mr. Wan informed the company of his intention to take leave by email and asked the relevant staff to tell him how to apply for leave, but the relevant staff did not give a clear answer, and the company's employee handbook did not clearly explain this. The court did not accept the company's statement.

After receiving the relocation notice, Mr. Wan refused in an email, but he did not stop working, so he should not be considered absent from work. Nokia did not urge Mr. Wan to move as soon as possible, did not close Mr. Wan's original office, and did not inform him that he would be treated as absent from work if he did not go to the new office. Instead, Nokia directly considered Mr. Wan absent from work and issued a notice to terminate the employment relationship with him, which was inappropriate.

In summary, the court held that Nokia had illegally terminated the labor contract. Mr. Wan's claim was legally justified, and the court supported it in the final instance. The judgment made by the original court was inappropriate and was corrected.

Link: An open-ended contract is not a "iron rice bowl"

Article 14 of my country's Labor Contract Law stipulates that an open-ended labor contract refers to a labor contract in which the employer and the employee agree that there is no fixed termination date.

The advantage of an open-ended employment contract is that for employers, it helps reduce the losses caused by frequent replacement of key personnel in key positions; for workers, it is also conducive to achieving long-term stable careers.

The Labor Contract Law also stipulates that when an employer reduces its staff, it should give priority to retaining those with indefinite labor contracts.

However, the indefinite termination date mentioned here does not mean an "iron rice bowl" with no termination date. As long as the conditions stipulated by law are met, both the employee and the employer can terminate the labor contract in accordance with the law.

As a winner of Toutiao's Qingyun Plan and Baijiahao's Bai+ Plan, the 2019 Baidu Digital Author of the Year, the Baijiahao's Most Popular Author in the Technology Field, the 2019 Sogou Technology and Culture Author, and the 2021 Baijiahao Quarterly Influential Creator, he has won many awards, including the 2013 Sohu Best Industry Media Person, the 2015 China New Media Entrepreneurship Competition Beijing Third Place, the 2015 Guangmang Experience Award, the 2015 China New Media Entrepreneurship Competition Finals Third Place, and the 2018 Baidu Dynamic Annual Powerful Celebrity.