Employees Ask For Overtime: Retaining Evidence Is The Key To Winning The Lawsuit.

The "996 working hour system" is very popular at present, and the trend of "5+2" and "white + black" has been overshadowed.

However, no matter how the "name" changes, the system of working hours that does not respect employees' right to rest does not meet the requirements of the law.

Recently, the court judge of Beijing Shijingshan District found that he was asking for money.

In the case of labor disputes, it is difficult for employees to win a lawsuit. One of the important reasons is that employees fail to provide sufficient evidence.

The law of our country not only stipulates the overtime hours of laborers, but also stipulates that employers should arrange overtime work for workers to arrange overtime work.

However, in practice, many enterprises do not fully protect their employees' right to rest, nor do they pay wages according to the law.

According to statistics, 384 Cases of labor disputes were concluded in Shijingshan District court of Beijing in 2015, including the removal of withdrawal and mediation, and the total number of cases was 153.

In these 153 cases, the claims of laborers were totally not supported by the court, only 36. In the remaining 117 cases, the workers' claims were fully or partly supported, and the workers' winning rate reached 76.47%.

Of the 153 cases that were decided by way of judgment, 131 involved overtime pay, but only 7 of the court decided that the employer should pay overtime, and the worker's winning rate was only 5.34%.

Xiao Zhang entered a company in 6 2014, and the two sides did not sign a labor contract.

In March 2015, the two sides had a dispute over the termination of labor relations.

In the litigation stage, Xiao Zhang asked the unit to pay overtime and did not sign the written contract.

The double wage gap is 8 yuan.

After hearing the evidence, witness testimony and the monthly remittance of Xiao Zhang to Xiao Zhang, the court found that Xiao Zhang had a labor relationship with the company, and finally supported Xiao Zhang's claim that he had not signed the written labor contract double wage difference and the illegal rescission of the economic compensation for the labor contract, but dismissed Xiao Zhang's claim for overtime payment on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

According to the interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the application of law in labor dispute cases (three), workers who claim overtime pay should bear the fact of overtime.

。

However, the workers have evidence to prove that the employer is in possession of the evidence of overtime facts, and the employer does not provide the employer with adverse consequences.

In this case, Xiao Zhang did not provide evidence to prove the existence of overtime, so the court rejected its claim for overtime.

Xiao Wang entered a company in 3 months in 2014. He worked six days a week and worked 9 hours a day.

In June 2015, due to the restructuring of the company, the two sides terminated the labor contract through consultation, but they did not pay the overtime wages that Xiao Wang owed.

The two sides contended for justice.

In the litigation stage, the court found that the watchman and other staff members of Xiao Wang's attendance sheet (without official seal) were employees of the company. According to the evidence, the company did not pay the overtime payment of Wang Wang in full.

Although the company did not recognize the attendance without a public seal submitted by Xiao Wang, the court explained that the company refused to submit the attendance record with the official seal and did not notify the watchmaker to appear in court. The court decided the authenticity of the attendance schedule submitted by Xiao Wang, and decided that the company should make up for Gabanfi, who worked overtime for 150% hours, and paid overtime on the basis of 200% wages.

In this case, the key to Xiao Wang's success is to submit a time table to the court.

This shows that the key to winning a lawsuit is evidence.

China's labor law, labor contract law and other laws protect workers very well. The reason why some workers' claims are not supported is mainly due to the retention of evidence.

Therefore, it is suggested that workers in their daily work can keep some photos of daily work, wages, work permits, company notices (preferably official seals), videos, attendance records and so on.