Worker's Daily editorial: Employees cannot face the helplessness and helplessness of "arbitrary job transfers". Legal | Employers | Employees

Some employers do not have a correct understanding of the legal meaning of employment autonomy, one-sided emphasis on management priority, and are accustomed to emphasizing that employees must obey unilaterally, lacking the awareness of equal consultation; Some employees overly emphasize the provisions of labor contracts, believing that once they are agreed upon, they cannot be changed arbitrarily, and their understanding of the rationality of job transfers is insufficient, resulting in the inability to reach a consensus through negotiation. Once both parties are influenced by emotions and unable to sit down and have a good conversation, it is easy to get into a stalemate or even file a lawsuit.

Disputes over arbitrary job transfers by employers often occur. According to a report by the Workers' Daily on August 24th, a logistics company in Beijing faced operational difficulties and had employees choose to either terminate their contracts or transfer their positions. However, some employees did not agree, and the company directly suspended the payment of their wages. With the help of labor union legal aid lawyers, employees have received the compensation they deserve. The practice of arbitrary job transfers by employers has sparked heated discussions.

Under market economy conditions, it is normal for employers to adjust their internal positions due to production and business needs. Relevant laws also allow employers to adjust the work positions and locations of workers reasonably based on their own production and operation needs. However, when employers exercise the right to transfer positions, they cannot consider it as a borderless right, and cannot only emphasize the needs of the employer while ignoring the reasonable demands of the employees, or even let the employees make a choice. Such behavior not only infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of employees, but may also push employers towards the defendant's seat; Not only is it not conducive to the stability of labor relations, but it is also a manifestation of the employer's lack of social responsibility. Previously, in the guiding case jointly issued by the Supreme People's Court and the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, a negative judgment was made on the unreasonable job transfer behavior of employers.

Some employers have sparked controversy due to "arbitrary job transfers", which are often the result of mutual confrontation. Some employers have only a partial understanding of the provisions of laws and regulations, or do not have a correct understanding of the legal meaning of employment autonomy. They unilaterally emphasize management priority, are accustomed to emphasizing that employees must obey unilaterally, lack the awareness of equal negotiation, do not respect or value the expression of employees' wishes, and even hold the idea that employees will not easily sue; Some employees overly emphasize the provisions of labor contracts, believing that once they are agreed upon, they cannot be changed arbitrarily. They do not have a sufficient understanding of the rationality of job transfers and only emphasize their own difficulties, resulting in negotiations being unable to reach a consensus. Once both parties are influenced by emotions and unable to sit down and have a good conversation, it is easy to get into a stalemate or even file a lawsuit.

In fact, the issue of job transfer during the performance of a labor contract is not necessarily the result of "you win, I lose". Although the Labor Law and Labor Contract Law do not provide clear provisions on the legality of job transfers, in judicial practice, there has always been a basic principle of reasonableness in job transfers. In guiding cases issued by relevant courts, it is required that the court review the reasonableness of job transfers, such as whether they are based on the production and operation needs of the employer, whether they constitute significant changes to the labor contract agreement, whether they are discriminatory or insulting to the worker, whether they have a significant impact on labor remuneration and other working conditions, whether the worker is competent for the adjusted position, whether the workplace has been adjusted, and whether the employer has provided necessary assistance or compensation. The principle of reasonableness provides a normative boundary for judging the legitimacy of job transfers.

Some employers, in the process of job transfer, make employees choose to either terminate the contract or transfer, which objectively violates the principle of reasonableness, leaving employees both helpless and injured. It can be said that the unconstrained "arbitrary job transfer" by employers has become a problem that is not conducive to the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of employees and hinders the construction of harmonious labor relations.

The key to resolving disputes arising from arbitrary job transfers by employers is for both employers and employees to maintain a rational and negotiated attitude, and have a clear understanding of the legal boundaries of job transfers. On the one hand, employers should have a rule of law mindset and abide by the boundaries of employment management rights when using them. Relevant parties should inform employers of the boundaries of job transfers and remind them to adjust their positions rationally through legal publicity, physical examinations of labor laws and regulations, legal interpretations in labor supervision, arbitration, and litigation courts, and issuing judicial recommendations. At the same time, it is necessary to make some employers who are arbitrarily transferred pay the economic cost. On the other hand, when facing job transfers from employers, employees should rationally protect their rights. For unreasonable job transfers from employers, they should clearly point out their illegality and irrationality, and dare to use legal means to protect their rights. At the same time, the reasonable job transfer behavior of employers cannot be ignored by the provisions of the labor contract, but should be fully negotiated. Trade unions should strengthen their rights protection services for irrational job transfers by employers, and make good use of legal aid and the "two books and one letter" system to provide workers with an umbrella for protecting their rights.

We hope that the relevant judgment can serve as a warning to employers for arbitrary job transfers, urging them to exercise caution in their use of power, and solidly promoting the further harmonious development of labor relations.