Our company requires security guards to check their bags after work every day. If you don't check with the security guard, you will be fined. Is this an invasion of privacy?

You can sue your company.

The following are related cases.

Every time after work, the words "please take the initiative to open the bag to cooperate with the security work" will be played repeatedly in the loudspeaker in the employee aisle of Bailey Road Department Store. Watch the "notice for employees" on the wall of the aisle, which says "employees should take the initiative to open their schoolbags for inspection when leaving the mall" and so on. Most employees will open their schoolbags when they go to the gate after punching in. The security guard standing by looked into the bag and the employees could pass. For some employees with big schoolbags who don't take the initiative to open them, the security guard will stop them and let them open their schoolbags for inspection before releasing them.

A few days ago, our reporter investigated the matter Several employees in the building said that they really could not understand and accept the company's decision. Some time ago, the company also asked employees to open their schoolbags after work, but under the strong opposition of most employees, it was only implemented for two days. Who knows that on the morning of February 5, 65438, the supervisor on the first floor announced to everyone that the company would implement the off-duty inspection regulations again. If the employee does not open the bag voluntarily, the floor supervisor has the right to open the bag for inspection. Employees all say that they have no choice but to accept such inspection.

Regarding the "package inspection", the deputy general manager of Bailidao Department Store said in an interview that the reason why the company established the package inspection system was mainly because it received complaints from many vendors, and the goods in their shopping malls were repeatedly lost. Previously, when the company implemented this regulation, it was opposed by many employees and even had some disputes. In view of this situation, when the company leaders announced this decision to the middle-level leaders, they specifically pointed out that only employees are required to open their schoolbags voluntarily for inspection, and the phenomenon of forcibly checking schoolbags and security guards rummaging through employees' schoolbags is resolutely not allowed. It is estimated that there is a deviation in the communication process between floor leaders and employees, and security guards should not intercept employees and touch their schoolbags during actual inspection. The deputy general manager also said that whether employees accept the unpacking inspection is entirely voluntary, and the company will not deal with or dismiss employees because they do not accept such inspections. As for the words in the "Instructions for Employees" that require employees to "open their schoolbags voluntarily", they will immediately change it to "open their schoolbags voluntarily".

It is not the first department store that merchants "check bags" when employees get off work. This kind of incident is also very common, some are "forced" and some are "voluntary". Then, can employees "voluntarily" open their schoolbags for inspection, and can businesses be exempted?

■ The theory of "voluntariness" cannot be established.

Lawyer Zhou Yajun analyzed the behavior of "carrying a bag" in shopping malls from five aspects. First of all, he thinks this kind of behavior is voluntary but actually forced. As we all know, the employment situation in China is still grim. In particular, the technical content of sales staff is not high, and the supply in the labor market exceeds demand. Therefore, between leaders and employees, employees are in a weak position. The reason why employees give in to the leader's so-called voluntary "package inspection" requirement is because they don't want to lose this hard-won job. If they don't "voluntarily" check their luggage, they may lose their jobs, so they can only "voluntarily" against their will, which is not what employees really mean. So: it is voluntary, but it is forced! Secondly, if someone really steals goods, then such people will not exceed 1% of all employees, otherwise, the department store is likely to have been stolen. As a leader, you can't investigate people who steal goods, which shows that you are incompetent and incompetent. At the same time, the above facts also show that 99% of employees in department stores are good people and abide by the law. "Checking bags" is an insult to these people! With the incompetence of the leader, not only do you not blame yourself, but you insult 99% of the employees and lose your morality! Third, human dignity is supreme and should be respected. A person who doesn't respect the personality of employees will never manage an enterprise well! A person who insults employees' personality will inevitably lead to the bankruptcy of the enterprise. Because, the fire of humiliation and anger ignited by personality insult in people's hearts is enough to destroy any enterprise! Moreover, Article 38 of the Constitution of People's Republic of China (PRC) clearly stipulates: "The personal dignity of the people of China and the citizens of China is inviolable." Personal dignity is one of citizens' personal rights, which includes respect for people's moral quality. The behavior of "checking bags" expresses doubts and trampling on the moral quality of employees. So it is illegal and must be corrected immediately. And individual rights

It is a basic human right, which cannot be bought or sold, nor can it be the content of a labor contract. This right shall not be restricted or deprived except in accordance with the law. The so-called "voluntary" theory cannot be established.

In addition, the Party Central Committee has proposed to build a harmonious socialist society, which reflects the requirements of the times and the wishes of the people. Social harmony must first realize the harmony between labor and capital, otherwise it is empty talk. Nowadays, mediating labor disputes, easing social contradictions and preventing contradictions from intensifying have put forward higher requirements for trade union work. It is urgent to reform the trade union system, make it independent and truly become the spokesman of workers' interests!

■ Department stores infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of employees.

Zhang Yongmin, a lawyer, thinks that department stores violate the personal freedom of employees. He said, first of all, Article 37 of the Constitution of China clearly stipulates that the personal freedom of the people of China and the citizens of China shall not be infringed. Citizens' right to personal freedom refers to the right of citizens to be under their own control and not be arrested, detained, searched or violated without legal procedures. Secondly, the first article of the Labor Law makes it clear at the beginning that its legislative principle and purpose are to protect the legitimate rights and interests of workers. However, the internal system of department stores requires employees to check their schoolbags after work, which violates the existing laws in China, is an illegal requirement for employees to search, and is also a serious violation of employees' personal dignity. Checking employees' schoolbags is essentially a form of searching, and the law stipulates that searching can only be carried out through legal procedures and by a specific organ, so the internal regulations of department stores are invalid.

Checking employees' schoolbags will also violate employees' privacy rights. What employees put in their schoolbags is personal, and there may also be personal items that are inconvenient for others to know, so compulsory bag search violates employees' privacy rights.

In addition, lawyer Zhang also believes that the name of the department store is voluntary, but it is mandatory. The affiliation and management relationship between employers and employees determines that the relationship between them is unequal, and the current employment situation makes this inequality more prominent. This has also led to the department store employees accepting the package inspection involuntarily, but only in the form of "voluntary".

■ Articles carried by citizens are extensions of the human body and are also protected by law.

Lawyer Su believes that this regulation is illegal. At the same time, according to the provisions of Article 37 of the Constitution of People's Republic of China (PRC), it is forbidden to illegally detain or deprive or restrict citizens' personal freedom by other means, and it is forbidden to illegally examine citizens' bodies. Article 13 of the Trade Union Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that trade unions have the right to stop illegal acts such as seizing employees' resident identity cards or other legal documents, illegally searching and detaining employees, insulting, corporal punishment and beating employees; If losses are caused to employees, the trade union shall put forward suggestions to the relevant units to deal with them according to law, or support the injured employees to sue in the people's court. Accordingly, it is illegal for supermarkets to stipulate that employees should open their personal belongings for inspection by security personnel.

It is certain that the personal rights of China citizens are protected by law. Articles carried by citizens are attached to personal rights, which are an extension of the human body and are also protected by law. As an employer, shopping malls do not have the authority of some judicial organs in China, nor have they gone through legal procedures or been authorized by the National People's Congress. It is inconsistent with laws and regulations to require its employees to take the initiative to accept inspections. At the same time, this regulation will also have a negative impact on the psychology and personal dignity of its employees. If this kind of behavior is not stopped and promoted by other employers, it will make the legal provisions of our country exist in name only and the personal rights will not be guaranteed.

Therefore, the incident should be banned to prevent similar incidents from happening again. People-oriented and building a harmonious society are also the requirements of the central government for the whole society.

■ It is not illegal for a department store to "carry a bag".

Lawyer Guo has different views on the behavior of "checking luggage" in shopping malls. He believes that the nature and working conditions of the unit determine the management mode of the unit, and the supermarket or shopping mall industry has certain particularity in its own management mode. In order to maintain normal operation, the unit has the right to adopt appropriate management methods without violating the law. At present, there are no special regulations on how to manage supermarket employees in China.

First of all, the bag inspection in department stores is based on voluntariness. Each of us must accept certain constraints and obey the management of the unit. This management mode of department stores should have existed for a long time. When employees go to work in department stores, they should know that they have to accept this management model. Employees all know this. China law stipulates that the civil rights of equal subjects are based on voluntariness, not to mention the administrative subordination of department stores. According to this affiliation, under the condition of not violating voluntariness,

Secondly, there is no invasion of privacy in the management of department stores. It has become a common practice for department stores to adopt this management method. Check at a fixed place and time after work every day. If employees think their bags are private and don't want to be known, they can take corresponding measures to protect them, such as storing them at work and not bringing them into the workplace. Since they know that they will be brought into the workplace by inspection, it means that there is no privacy in the bag.

Moreover, the management of department stores has not violated the personality rights of employees. What needs to be clear is that the inspection of department stores cannot infer that someone is a thief. This kind of inspection is aimed at an unspecified number of people. After work, we should check everyone concerned, instead of suspecting someone or some people, and conduct targeted inspections. The personal dignity of the inspected person has not been degraded in the process of inspection, let alone violated his personality right.

However, although the operation of department stores is not illegal, it is not an advanced way of modern enterprises. With the development and progress of science and technology, this management method will gradually disappear.

■ Shopping in shopping malls is a serious infringement.

Lawyer Dai believes that the behavior of shopping mall employees "checking bags" is a very serious problem and should not appear. Dai said: "But this phenomenon is not uncommon in many shopping malls and supermarkets." . The "check-in with a bag" incident exposed and reflected two problems: first, the infringement problem in shopping malls is serious, and second, the employees' self-protection awareness is weak or helpless, but these two problems are affected by many factors.

The infringement of shopping malls shows that shopping malls have no right to carry out this kind of behavior at all, because only when citizens are suspected of violating the law and committing crimes can public security organs or other authorized organs exercise this right against specific objects in accordance with legal procedures, and shopping malls have no right to carry out this kind of behavior against citizens under any circumstances. Its seriousness is manifested in the following aspects: First, it is a general violation of all employees and a serious violation of citizens' personal rights. Secondly, the seriousness of this behavior lies in the fact that the mall assumes in advance that all employees hired on the basis of trust are thieves who steal their own property. It is also different from the situation of searching customers in shopping malls or supermarkets in the past because it is not targeted.

Another point may also be the controversial point of whether the behavior of the shopping mall constitutes infringement, that is, the shopping mall reminds employees to cooperate with the inspection automatically through notification or broadcast. Can you say that there is no infringement in the mall? In fact, the wishes of employees are a form, not a true expression from the heart. It is a helpless move influenced by many factors such as employment. Therefore, the employee's cooperation that is not really expressed cannot constitute a legitimate reason for the behavior of the mall.

■ "Checking packages" is an obvious violation of employees' most basic human rights.

Lawyer Yang Zhongkai said that enterprises and employees are closely related. In today's society, where there are labor relations, there are enterprises and employees. However, due to the dominant position of enterprises, the legitimate rights and interests of employees are often violated. The "package inspection" incident of department store employees is one of the typical examples.

From the legal point of view, the behavior of "carrying bags" for employees in department stores after work is a serious violation of employees' "personality rights". Department stores require "package inspection", and employees will have to force inspection if they disagree. This is a serious violation of employees' personal dignity, and employees can rely on the law to safeguard their legitimate rights. Because the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) clearly stipulate that employees can determine their liability for compensation according to the degree of the infringer's fault, the specific circumstances, consequences and effects of the infringement.

Now all countries in the world attach great importance to the protection of human rights, and this behavior of department stores is an obvious violation of the most basic human rights of employees. Because the Constitution of People's Republic of China (PRC) clearly stipulates that "the state respects and protects human rights", this behavior of department stores is a great insult to the personal dignity of employees and a challenge to the protection of human rights, which will not be allowed by law. At the same time, this behavior of department stores also violates the labor law. There is an employment relationship between the two parties to the labor contract in the process of performing the labor contract, but it is limited to the labor services of both parties and should be respected and equal in other aspects; This behavior of department stores is distrust and disrespect for employees.

Unless, of course, our country's laws provide otherwise for "bag searching" or even body searching; For example, the special regulations made by the state for certain special industries and the need of the state judicial organs to trace crimes can be searched.

In addition, if both parties have clearly agreed that employees can be "inspected" when signing the contract, it is ok within the scope of not infringing employees' personal rights, because if both parties are willing, it will conform to the basic principles of voluntariness and equality in the contract law; Therefore, as long as it is within the scope stipulated in the contract, it is legal for department stores to "check packages" for employees. However, if the department store suddenly "checks the packages" of employees without notifying them in advance, it will damage the personality rights of employees. To sum up, this behavior of department stores is a serious violation of personality rights and violates the laws of our country; Employees can sue them or protect their legal rights in other ways.