Before Training, Staff Training Fee Is Collected, And The Unit Is Illegally Returned.

Before the unit trains employees, it requires the workers to pay their own training fees first, and make an appointment to refund the employees after 5 years' work.

Recently, the request from the staff to return the training fee was supported by the court.

In October 2008, Huang applied for a mechanic manufacturing company as a trainee apprentice.

The two sides signed a training contract for technical workers.

Contract: the company is responsible for Huang's Turner.

Study and training, training period of not less than 6 months, Huang paid 6 months training fee of 4800 yuan.

After working for 5 years, Huang started to refund the training fee by installments, and agreed the guarantor and the guarantee responsibility.

Huang has been working in the company since he completed his studies, but Huang did not pay for it.

On the grounds of that, it is required to terminate the labor relationship and refund the training fee.

After the court decided to support Huang's request, the company refused to accept it.

To the intermediate people's court.

The Central People's court held that, according to the law, employers should provide special training fees for workers, and if they engage in professional and technical training, they may conclude an agreement with the worker and stipulate the term of service, and the employing units shall not collect property from laborers in the name of guaranty or other names.

The company signed an agreement with Huang and agreed on the service period, but the training fee was first charged by the company, not the company first provided, and the agreement also designated the guarantor, and agreed on the guarantee responsibility, which is obviously contrary to the law.

Finally, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original verdict.

Related links:

In July 2009, Ms Xu worked in a private enterprise after graduating from university.

In December 2014, Ms. Xu submitted a letter of resignation to the company and explained that he was forced to resign because of the company's failure to pay the housing provident fund. At the same time, he asked the company to issue a certificate of resignation and handle the declaration procedure of unemployment insurance.

The company commended that the woman resigned voluntarily and could not receive unemployment insurance payment.

In that case, the employees resigned because they did not pay the provident fund, could they receive unemployment insurance benefits?

The forty-fifth provision of the social insurance law stipulates that: "if the unemployed meet the following conditions, they shall receive unemployment insurance benefits from the unemployment insurance fund: (1) the employer and the employer have paid the unemployment insurance premium for 1 years before the unemployment," (two) the employment is not interrupted because of their wishes; (three) the unemployment registration has been carried out, and there are job requirements.

The article stipulates: "no interruption of employment due to my wishes includes the following situations: (1) termination of labor contracts in accordance with forty-fourth items, first items, fourth items and fifth provisions of the labor contract law; (two) the termination of the labor contract by the employer in accordance with the provisions of the labor contract law thirty-ninth, fortieth and forty-first; (three) the employing unit shall, in accordance with the provisions of the employment contract law, stipulate the termination of the labor contract to the laborers and terminate the labor contract with the laborers through consultation; (thirty-sixth) the employer shall rescind the employment contract or the employer dismissal, remove the name and expel the employee; (the worker) himself shall terminate the labor contract in accordance with the provisions of the employment contract law; (b) other circumstances stipulated by the laws, regulations and rules." provisions on the implementation of the "social insurance law of the People's Republic of China" thirteenth

The unit does not pay provident fund, whether the worker can resign accordingly, the stipulation is not clear.

However, in the eighteenth tenth provisions of the regulations on the implementation of the labor contract law, if the employing unit violates the mandatory provisions of the laws and administrative regulations, the laborer may terminate the labor contract.

If the employer fails to pay the provident fund, is it a violation of the mandatory provisions of the laws and administrative regulations? The twentieth provision of the regulations on housing provident fund management stipulates: "the unit shall pay the housing accumulation fund on time and in full, and shall not overdue payment or Shao Jiao."

The thirty-eighth provision: "in violation of the provisions of this Ordinance, the unit fails to pay or pay less housing provident fund within the time limit, shall be ordered by the housing provident fund management center to pay the deposit within a prescribed time limit: the people's court shall apply for compulsory execution if it fails to pay the deposit within the time limit."

Accordingly, paying the provident fund for employees is the legal obligation of the employer. The employer fails to pay the deposit, which is a violation of the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations.

In this case, the company did not pay the provident fund in accordance with the law. Ms. Xu resigned accordingly. It was "not interrupted because of my intention to work" and could enjoy unemployment insurance.