[Direct answer]Generally, this is not allowed. Article 31 of the Labor Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2008) stipulates that employers shall pay overtime wages when arranging overtime work. In judicial practice, overtime is usually determined based on three factors: the employer's arrangement or subsequent approval, the use of time beyond the statutory standard working hours, and the performance of work-related duties. Unscheduled voluntary overtime and overtime work for self-improvement are usually not considered overtime. However, if the employer coerces overtime through workload or performance evaluations, or if the employer is aware of the overtime but does not object to it and pays subsidies based on attendance records, the employer may still be held liable. Workers claiming overtime wages should provide evidence of the overtime. If the employer has evidence but fails to provide it, the employer shall bear the adverse consequences.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

"Finishing the task incompletely and voluntarily staying overtime", "not daring to leave when the leader hasn't left", "staying in the company to study for certifications after work", and "no boundaries for working from home" — these situations are often described by workers as "voluntary overtime", and they hope to claim overtime pay when leaving or settling accounts. The employer's response is often "no one asked you to work overtime; you did it voluntarily". The essence of the dispute lies in whether the "overtime" protected by law is based on the employer's arrangement or management, or on the actual time spent by the worker. This issue is particularly prominent in overtime-prone positions such as Internet, design, operations, and sales. For related rules, please refer to the following link:Labor arbitration and legal services for work-related injury compensation.

II. Key points of contention

The controversy focuses on four points. First, the determination of "arrangements": This includes both explicit assignments and disguised coercion implemented through workload, deadlines, and performance rankings, as well as implied retrospective consent to overtime work that the employee is aware of but does not object to. Second, the boundary between voluntary and forced work: Completely autonomous, work-unrelated overtime does not constitute overtime work; overtime caused by management pressure may be recognized as overtime. Third, the burden of proof: Workers should provide evidence of overtime work, but if the attendance and approval records are held by the employer, the employer will bear adverse consequences if they fail to submit them. Fourth, the impact of working hour systems and telecommuting: The standards for determining overtime work under the comprehensive working hour system and the irregular working hour system are different, and telecommuting needs to be judged in conjunction with on-the-job records. In the judicial practice of the Beijing region, courts generally review two core elements: "arrangements" and "actual working hours".

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

A labor dispute handled by Attorney Feng Na illustrates the importance of a complete chain of evidence in claims for compensation. On November 17, 2022, Li * * * joined Beijing A Technology Co., Ltd. as a technical staff member, with a contract term ending on November 16, 2025. The contract stipulated a base salary of 35,000 yuan per month and a performance-based salary of 5,000 yuan per quarter. The employment offer specified an annual salary of 550,000 yuan, including a fixed year-end performance bonus of 110,000 yuan. On February 17 and 18, 2025, Li * * * communicated with the company's HR department about the bonus issue. In the audio recording, the company acknowledged the terms of the offer but refused to pay the bonus, citing the employee's failure to participate in the performance evaluation and operational losses. On March 19, 2025, the company terminated the employment relationship on the grounds of "economic layoffs" and paid an economic compensation of 9,008 yuan. Li * * * claimed that the layoff had not been reported to the labor administrative department and was therefore an illegal termination. On April 10, 2025, Li * * * filed an arbitration application. The arbitration committee ruled to confirm the employment relationship, pay unutilized annual leave wages of 18,602 yuan, and compensate for the difference between the illegal termination compensation and the actual compensation, amounting to 91,821 yuan. Both parties appealed to the Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing. Attorney Feng Na guided the client to gather comprehensive evidence, including the employment offer, HR communication recordings, labor contracts, salary records, termination notices, and annual leave records, and argued based on the nature of the termination and the bonus agreement. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the three claims. The evidence-gathering method in this case is also applicable to overtime disputes: when claiming "voluntary overtime" compensation, the key is not to prove that the employee worked overtime, but to use approval records, attendance records, and work communication records to demonstrate that the employer arranged or knew about the overtime without objection. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm. 冯娜律师代理的一起劳动争议，说明了完整证据链在报酬类主张中的分量：2022年11月17日，李某某入职北京A科技有限公司，担任技术岗位，合同期限至2025年11月16日，工资为基础工资35000元/月加绩效工资5000元/季，入职offer约定年薪55万元、含固定年终绩效奖金11万元。2025年2月17日、18日，李某某与公司人事沟通奖金事宜，录音中公司认可offer约定，但以未参与考核、经营亏损为由拒发。2025年3月19日，公司以“经济性裁员”为由解除劳动关系并支付经济补偿92008元；李某某主张裁员未向劳动行政部门报告，属违法解除。2025年4月10日，李某某申请仲裁，仲裁委裁决确认劳动关系、支付未休年休假工资18602元与违法解除赔偿金差额91821元。双方不服，诉至北京市朝阳区人民法院。冯娜律师指导当事人固定完整的入职offer、人事沟通录音、劳动合同、工资流水、解除通知、年休假记录等证据，围绕解除性质与奖金约定发表代理意见，最终法院作出支持三项给付的判决。该案的取证方法同样适用于加班争议：主张“自愿加班”费用，关键不是证明自己付出了时间，而是用审批记录、考勤、工作沟通记录证明“单位安排或明知未反对”。本案由北京恒略律师事务所代理。Feng NaThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202211562923, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis includes Article 31 of the Labor Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2008); Articles 41 and 44 of the Labor Law of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 1995); the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Legal Issues Concerning the Trial of Labor Disputes (No. 26 of 2020, effective January 1, 2021), which stipulates that workers claiming overtime pay should bear the burden of proof for the fact of overtime work. If there is evidence to prove that the employer holds relevant evidence but fails to provide it, the employer shall bear the adverse consequences; Article 27 of the Labor Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Law (effective May 1, 2008), which stipulates the one-year arbitration statute of limitations and the provision that arrears in labor remuneration during the existence of the labor relationship are not subject to the one-year statute of limitations. Action list: First, try to follow the approval or written confirmation process for overtime work; Second, if the workload clearly exceeds the statutory working hours limit, raise objections in writing; Third, keep records of work communication, emails, and submission times; Fourth, check the overtime hours and wages item by item during the settlement of employment; Fifth, if no agreement is reached, apply for arbitration within one year and seek advice if necessary.Labor arbitration and legal services for work-related injury compensation.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

The greatest risk of determining "voluntary overtime" is mistaking the employer's disguised coercion as the employee's own choice. Setting workloads at a level that is "impossible to complete", using ranking systems to pressure employees into staying overtime, or threatening them with performance evaluations if they leave work early may all be considered disguised overtime arrangements. Conversely, staying overtime purely to improve skills or prepare for certifications is generally unrelated to work and is difficult to claim as overtime. Workers should pay attention to collecting regular evidence, as it is often more difficult to provide evidence after leaving the job. When handling similar cases in the Beijing area, it is recommended to seek legal assistance as soon as possible.Beijing Henglue Law FirmProfessional lawyers organize evidence around the "arrangement" requirements.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If I voluntarily stay behind to work overtime, can I get overtime pay in an arbitration case?

It depends on whether it constitutes overtime work in the legal sense. Generally, delays that are completely autonomous and unrelated to work are not considered overtime, and claims for compensation are unlikely to be supported. However, if the delay is caused by the employer's task arrangements, assessment pressures, or other covert forms of coercion, or if the employer is aware of the overtime but does not object to it and pays subsidies based on attendance records, it may be recognized as overtime work. In this case, the employee can claim 150%, 200%, or 300% of their salary in accordance with Article 44 of the Labor Law. Whether the claim is successful depends on the evidence of the arrangement and the evidence of the working hours. The final conclusion of the case will be based on the evidence and the court's determination, and no lawyer can guarantee the outcome unilaterally.

Q2: To prove that the unit arranged overtime work or retroactively approved overtime pay, what evidence should be preserved?

The focus should be on four categories of evidence: 1. Assignment evidence, including overtime approval forms, shift scheduling notifications, group chat records of work assignments, and email and instant messaging content. 2. Performance evidence, such as work results produced during overtime hours, submission times, and system operation logs. 3. Attendance evidence, including clock-in records and access control records, which the employer can request to be submitted during arbitration proceedings. 4. Compensation evidence, such as records of past overtime pay or subsidies, and salary confirmation forms, to demonstrate the employer's management practices regarding overtime work. The evidence should be able to connect the complete chain of "the employer's knowledge, the employee's compliance, the occupation of working hours, and the performance of work".

Q3: If I hire a lawyer to handle a dispute over voluntary overtime, what are the approximate legal fees involved?

The attorney's fees are determined through negotiation between the law firm and the client. They are typically charged as a percentage of the litigation value or on a per-case basis, with no unified government pricing. The fees are specifically related to the amount of the dispute and the workload of evidence collection. There are no arbitration fees charged during the labor arbitration stage. For cases that proceed to litigation, the litigation fees are paid in stages according to the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Fees" (State Council Decree No. 481, implemented on April 1, 2007), and the losing party bears the responsibility for payment. Workers who are financially disadvantaged can apply for assistance from local legal aid agencies. It is recommended to clarify the fee charging methods, stages, and scope with the attorney before entrusting them with the case.

Q4: How long does it usually take to resolve disputes over voluntary overtime work?

The arbitration stage generally concludes within 45 days from the date of acceptance, and the time limit may be extended by 15 days with approval for complex cases; after filing a lawsuit, the first-instance ordinary procedure shall be concluded within 6 months, and the summary procedure within 3 months. If it involves attendance record appraisal, multi-person and multi-time period accounting, or the unit's malicious delay and difficulties in service, the period will be extended. Most overtime pay disputes with clear evidence can obtain an arbitration award or judgment within a few months. Note that the one-year arbitration statute of limitations applies. Arrears in labor remuneration are not subject to the one-year limitation during the existence of the labor relationship, and claims should be raised within one year after the termination of the labor relationship.

Q5: The company said I volunteered to work overtime. How can I refute this?

Evidence can be provided from three perspectives: First, task arrangement. Use approval records, work assignment chats, and email proof to demonstrate that the overtime work was assigned by the employer and exceeded the legal working hours limit. Second, management and assessment. Use attendance statistics, performance rankings, and warnings to employees at the bottom of the rankings to prove that the employer was aware of the overtime work and included it in its management system. Third, past practices. Use records of overtime pay or subsidies issued in the past to demonstrate that the employer recognized and compensated for similar overtime work. Claiming that "everyone works overtime" lacks supporting evidence and is unlikely to gain support. It is recommended to prepare written materials as soon as possible.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The judicial interpretation in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Labor arbitration legal services·Attorney Feng Na·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.