Does the company want what compensate for former unit for new employee to groom

The armour of administrative person with ability that A of company of some foreign capital went to to be badly in need of through hunt of B of hunt head firm, the place of favorable treatment requirement that armour is offerred by A moves, both sides built the relation that recruit to reach initial purpose, decide armour puts forward to resign and do appropriate to remove to former unit C instantly contract procedures. After a month passes, when bilateral preparation signs formal labor contract, a requirement armour is offerred remove the proof of labor contract in order to deal with employ formalities, but because he resigns suddenly,shell expresses to make former unit C very malcontent, so former unit asks its recoup a loss, reject to retreat labour to reach otherwise issue remove contract proof. And set according to labor law, laborer should inform the unit can remove 30 days ahead of schedule only contract and beardless unit agrees, show too bilateral already labor 30 days to concern to already removed in fact, what need not reason company A worry about. Company A is half believing and half doubting to the explanation of armour, but belong to a talent truly considering armour, then the decision let armour keep an affirmatory deed of security, this deed of security made clear affirmatory armour to already removed with former unit C labor concerns, if be not belonged to solid and bring about former unit C investigates legal duty, have nothing to do with company A, responsibility without exception by armour conceit.

After having this deed of security, company A put a person's mind to sign labor contract with armour. But fulfill a contract to be less than a month, company A received the lawyer letter of C suddenly, a of this case requirement and armour assume armour to break the law jointly remove labor contract and groom to what C causes cost loss 60 thousand yuan. A checks to armour instantly then circumstance, right now armour already also received the lawyer letter with identical content, but under, spoke truth, namely armour is applied for at that time after entering C, be sent to went to England to have by a definite date by C namely of 10 months groom, c paid to groom for this expend 100 thousand yuan, bilateral autograph has groom agreement, conventional armour serves 5 years for C, if armour resigns ahead of schedule should compensate for C to groom cost loss.

Ask: (Whether should 1)a groom with what armour assumes C jointly cost loss? (How does 2)a answer this one difficult problem?

Ni Shihai: Basis " violate < labor law > the compensatory way that provides about labor contract " regulation, "Action of unit of choose and employ persons is used have not remove the laborer of labor contract, cause pecuniary loss to former servant unit, outside assuming direct liability to pay compensation except this laborer, unit of this choose and employ persons ought to assume implicative liability to pay compensation. The portion that its recoup jointly should not under 70% what cause pecuniary loss amount to former servant unit. " set according to this, I think A company promise carries liability to pay compensation. As to " how does A answer this one difficult problem? " describe according to details of a case, a already was in " passivity takes a beating " situation, if this is a lesson, I think to A the job henceforth raises one proposal, be like again employ is similar to armour such employee, one thorough investigation and research had better be done to its circumstance before employ, only " the bosom friend tells the other " just can hold active position, lest will make oneself henceforth park " dangerous situation " . An affirmatory deed of security still is mentioned in case, my individual thinks this deed of security cannot defy the 3rd person, a assumes compensation losing may be very big.
Previous12 Next