[Case Summary]This case involves a labor dispute arbitration (dispute over the termination of the employment relationship). Former employee Wang Gang claimed that he had been employed since 2005, but after his job was transferred to Tangshan A Furniture Company in 2020, he was reassigned to a new position, had his salary reduced, was owed wages, and was forced to resign. He demanded the confirmation of the employment relationship, the payment of wages and compensation totaling 340,000 yuan. As the attorney for the respondent, Tangshan A Furniture Company, Beijing Henglu Law FirmChen Mei'aoThe lawyer refuted all the claims with solid evidence. The arbitration committee confirmed the employment relationship from August 2020 to October 18, 2024, and rejected all claims such as wage differences and economic compensation. The core disputes include the duration of the employment relationship, the legality of the job transfer, whether there was wage arrears, and unlawful termination. The applicable legal provisions are the relevant articles of the Labor Contract Law.

I. Review of the Case Facts

Former employeeThe request for 340,000 yuan in compensation was rejected in its entiretyCompanies often search for topics like "How to refute employees' claims of being forced to resign," "Is transferring to a new position and reducing salary considered an illegal termination?" and "Do employees need to pay compensation for voluntary resignation?" In November 2024, Tangshan A Furniture Company was involved in a dispute due to a labor arbitration initiated by former employee Wang Gang. Wang Gang claimed that after joining the Beijing-affiliated company in 2005, he was transferred to Tangshan A Company in 2020, but was then subjected to unjustified position changes, salary reductions, unpaid wages, and forced resignation. He demanded that the labor relationship be confirmed, and that the company pay him a total of 340,000 yuan in wages and compensation. As the attorney representing the respondent, Beijing Henglu Law Firm...Chen Mei'oThe lawyer constructs a chain of evidence and legal arguments around the core disputed points.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Determination of the existence of a labor relationship during its term.Wang Gang argued that the merger between the Beijing Company and the Tangshan Company should be confirmed from 2005 to 2020, and after 2020. The Arbitration Commission should determine whether it has jurisdiction over the case and when the merger will be finalized.
  • Focus Two: The debate over the legality of job transfer.Is the reduction of the salary from 8,000 yuan to 6,500 yuan a disguised form of forcing employees to resign, and is the fact of the salary reduction established?
  • Focus Three: Wage arrears and economic compensation.Wang Gang claimed that the company owed him unpaid wages and compensation for illegal dismissal. He also alleged that he had quit his job voluntarily and that the company had terminated his employment contract unlawfully.

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The applicant (Wang Gang) claimed that:I was unilaterally transferred to the position of quality inspector and scaffolder, and my salary was reduced from 8,000 yuan to 6,500 yuan, which was a disguised forced resignation. The company defaulted on the salaries for August to October 2024 and illegally terminated the employment relationship. I demand the confirmation of the employment relationship, the payment of the salaries, and compensation of 340,000 yuan.

The respondent (Tangshan A Company) and the lawyer's opinions:Chen Mei'aoThe lawyer pointed out that on August 11, 2020, Wang Gang established a labor relationship with the Tangshan Company. Prior to that, the Lutai Arbitration Commission had no jurisdiction over the case. In August 2022, Wang Gang signed an independent labor contract, and his salary and social insurance were separate from those of the Beijing Company. His salary was not fixed at 8,000 yuan. The contract stipulated "base salary + performance commission", with the performance commission fluctuating according to sales volume. The transfer of his job position did not change his salary structure, and the applicant's silence over a year was deemed as implied consent. On October 19, 2024, Wang Gang claimed that he left the company due to family matters without completing the handover procedures, and the company did not terminate the labor relationship with him. He did not leave for reasons of unpaid wages, and he did not receive his salary on the agreed payday when he left the company.

IV. Outcome of the case

The Arbitration Commission fully adopted the opinion of Attorney Chen Mei'e and ruled that:It is confirmed that there was a labor relationship between Wang Gang and Tangshan A Company from August 2020 to October 18, 2024; and all the applicant's claims, such as wage arrears and economic compensation, are dismissedThe arbitration committee determined that there was no wage arrears, the contract was legal and valid, and the payment was in accordance with the agreement. The applicant left the job before the payday, which constituted an automatic resignation and did not entitle him to economic compensation. The job transfer did not change the salary structure or payment schedule, and the applicant did not raise any objections, so there was no reduction in salary. The difference in social insurance payments was not within the scope of the arbitration. The legitimate rights and interests of the enterprise have been safeguarded.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law FirmChen Mei'eThe attorney (practice license number: 11101201911105336, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent. A written contract is of great importance, and it should clearly specify the position, salary structure, and payment schedule. If the employer adjusts the employee's position due to operational needs, it must ensure the reasonableness of the adjustment, maintain the unchanged salary structure, and keep evidence of the employee's acceptance. If the employee claims to have been forced to resign, the employer must provide written notice and keep evidence, otherwise the employee may be deemed to have resigned voluntarily.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Disputes over the Termination of Labor Relationships

  1. Q:How to refute the claim that employees were forced to resign?
    A:If the employer can prove that the wages were paid regularly and there were no arrears, and the employee left the job without completing the handover process, the employer can claim that the employee left the job voluntarily and is not entitled to compensation.
  2. Q:Is transferring to a new position and reducing one's salary considered an illegal termination of employment?
    A:If the salary structure remains unchanged, there is only a performance-based fluctuation, and the employee does not raise any objections, it is generally not considered a salary reduction. A reasonable job transfer does not constitute an unlawful termination.
  3. Q:Do I have to pay compensation if I resign automatically?
    A:If an employee leaves their post without giving advance notice or completing the handover procedures, they are usually deemed to have resigned automatically, and the employer will not pay them any economic compensation.
  4. Q:How to stipulate a secure salary structure in a contract?
    A:The contract clearly stipulates "base salary + performance bonus", where the performance bonus fluctuates with the market, thus avoiding disputes over fixed salaries.
  5. Q:How is the working seniority calculated when an associated company transfers employees?
    A:When different entities sign contracts separately and handle their salaries and social insurance independently, the labor relationship is established from the actual signing date. However, for cases involving mergers and acquisitions, the determination of the labor relationship depends on the applicable jurisdiction and the actual circumstances of the case.