Who knows the legal cases about farmers?

What are the main aspects that the landlord didn't make clear? ...

-

Employers who are disabled by unlicensed welders are awarded 80% compensation.

Liu, a 24-year-old Anhui guy, did not have a welder's license, but went to work on repairing ships and welding. Results Back burns were caused by wrong operation, which constituted grade 8 disability. A few days ago, Liu sued the employer Dinghai Yongheng Ship Repair Company and the contractor Zhoushan Ligang Ship Repair Co., Ltd. to Ningbo Maritime Court, demanding that the two companies compensate for various losses 160435.7 yuan.

In the complaint, Liu claimed that three days before the incident, he was employed by Dinghai Forever Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. to do welding work, and the two sides agreed on a daily salary of 90 yuan. On the National Day of 2007, Eternal Company arranged for Liu to work overtime during the holiday and instructed him to weld the hull in the peak cabin of the "Far East Pioneer" under maintenance. Flammable articles of rosin water were placed in the cabin, and the welding sparks splashed on the rosin water, which led to a fire in the cabin and the plaintiff's body was burned in a large area. Liu was then taken to the hospital for emergency treatment. After discharge, it was identified as grade 8 disability.

The two companies have no objection to the fact that Liu was injured, but they think that the cause of the fire was caused by the plaintiff's gross fault, and Liu himself should bear most of the responsibility. Upon the application of Dinghai Forever Ship Repair Company, the court summoned Zhao, the foreman who arrived at the scene in time after the accident, and Zhao, who worked on the lower deck of the ship in fore peak tank at the time of the accident, to testify in court. Both witnesses said that there was no rosin water in the cabin at the time of the accident, and Liu had no other burns except his back. Stranger still, the plaintiff's underwear was burned, but his coat was intact. There was no explosion in the engine room and nothing burned. However, after Liu was burned, he fell into the bottom cabin, and the oxygen pipe used for welding and cutting also fell down, causing leakage.

Liu argued that his back was burned when he fled with his back to the fire source. Later, he argued that when the accident happened, there was a paint bucket without a cover in the engine room, which contained a small amount of rosin water. Because of work fatigue, he sat on it to weld, and the welding sparks splashed into the bucket and caused combustion. So only the back was burned, which seems to be a manifestation of deliberately concealing the cause of the accident.

After examination, the court held that the fact that the oxygen pipe was still leaking after the incident was witnessed by witnesses and could be recognized. Liu said that the cause of the accident was sitting on a paint bucket filled with rosin water and welding, and the rosin water in the bucket burned. However, according to the facts ascertained in the trial, only the plaintiff's back was burned, his buttocks were not burned, his underwear was not burned, and his coat was not burned. The cause and effect of Liu's statement cannot be reasonably explained. The court also held that pure oxygen itself will not burn, but under the action of pure oxygen, it can accelerate the burning of other articles. According to the plaintiff's injury, it is most likely that the reason for Liu's injury was that during welding in the stern cabin, the oxygen pipe of the cutting gun was tied to the back of the belt in violation of regulations to cool down, and the oxygen was ignited by the welding flower, causing combustion.

The court held that Liu did not have the qualification to engage in electric welding work, and as an adult with normal reason, he should know the danger of blowing air with oxygen tube during electric welding work, but Liu neglected his own safety and operated illegally, which eventually led to an accident, so he had a major fault in the accident. Dinghai Yongheng Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. failed to verify the plaintiff's welding qualification before employing him, and failed to provide him with relevant pre-job training after employing him. Therefore, the company also has some faults in Liu's wrong practices, and should bear the responsibility of the employer according to law. According to the relevant laws and regulations, under the principle of no-fault liability of the statutory employer, if the victim has gross negligence, the liability of the compensation obligor can be reduced.

Finally, the court finally ruled that Liu was responsible for 20% of the accident, Dinghai Forever Ship Repair Company was responsible for 80% of the accident, and Liu received compensation of 38,304.42 yuan; Zhoushan Ligang Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. shall be jointly and severally liable for compensation.

-

17-year-old migrant workers were injured for five consecutive days. Shanghai defended its rights and won the lawsuit of "industrial injury identification"

Due to working overtime for five consecutive days, Xiao Yang, an electrician from Henan Province, unfortunately fell off a three-meter-high ladder during his early morning work, causing serious brain damage and paralysis. This morning, the People's Court of Pudong New Area in Shanghai held a public hearing to hear the case that the construction company v. the Labor Insurance Bureau "revoked the identification of Xiao Yang's fall injury". Three and a half hours later, the court made a judgment in court to maintain the conclusion of work-related injury identification made by the Labor and Social Security Bureau of Pudong New Area.

Working overtime for five days and five nights.

In March 2006, Xiao Yang came to Yangzhou project contracted by Shanghai Yufu Construction and Installation Engineering Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yufu Company) to be an electrician. At that time, Xiao Yang and his workmates accepted the direct management of the "contractor" Gao, who paid Xiao Yang and others.

Three months later, Xiao Yang moved to another "Lantai Project" site in Changshu contracted by Yufu Company. In the early morning of September 1, Xiao Yang and other electricians who worked for five days and nights worked overtime to set up cables in the computer room according to Gao's arrangement. At about 0: 50 in the morning, Xiao Yang was working on the miter ladder, with his hand on the air duct bracket, and lost his center of gravity when he pulled the cable hard. Because the screws were not fixed firmly at that time, the seat belt didn't work. Even more deadly, Xiao Yang's helmet strap was not buckled. When he fell from a height of 3 meters, his helmet fell off, and Xiao Yang's head landed directly on the ground, bleeding from his ear, nose and throat, and he immediately became unconscious. After being rescued and treated in a local hospital for three months, Xiao Yang was transferred to Shanghai Changzheng Hospital for treatment. After diagnosis, Xiao Yang suffered from severe closed head injury and traumatic left frontotemporal skull defect.

Strange "reconciliation" agreement

On June 24th, 2006, 165438+ Gaoyi's own Shanghai Construction Engineering Service Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company, established in August 2006) signed an accident handling agreement with Xiao Yang's father. According to the agreement, Wang Jia Company will pay Xiao Yang's medical expenses, salary subsidies, follow-up treatment expenses and settling-in expenses. However, Xiao Yang's parents must promise that all future expenses such as recovery treatment, living expenses and settling-in expenses have nothing to do with Wang Jia Company, and there is no dispute between the two parties in any form. Xiao Yang "shall not ask other third parties for any form of expenses in any form".

However, the high medical expenses still overwhelmed the Yang family. Looking at Xiao Yang, who was unconscious, in February 2007, Xiao Yang's family applied to the Labor Arbitration Committee for arbitration, asking Yufu Company to pay Xiao Yang's comprehensive insurance fees for foreign employees in Shanghai from March to September 2006, and the arbitration supported Xiao Yang's request. Yufu Company refused to accept this and filed a lawsuit with the court, which has gone through the first and second trials. On August 29th, 2007, Xiao Yang applied to the Labor and Social Security Bureau of Pudong New Area for work-related injury identification. In September, the Labor Insurance Bureau officially accepted the case. On April 1 1, 2008, the Labor Insurance Bureau issued a work-related injury certificate, which determined that Xiao Yang constituted a work-related injury.

One is "refusing to admit" and the other is "rushing to admit"

In today's trial, Ding Shouxing, president of the hospital, personally served as the presiding judge of this case, and Wang Jiazhen, director of the Labor and Social Security Bureau of Pudong New Area, appeared in court.

During the trial, the agent of Yufu Company said that Xiao Yang was not an employee of Yufu Company, but had a labor contract relationship with Gao Kai's company at the time of the accident, and Xiao Yang was "assigned by the company to work in the accident place", so it was "wrong" for the Labor Insurance Bureau to regard Yufu Company as a work-related injury identification unit.

Yufu Company also thinks that there is something wrong with the procedure of labor insurance bureau to identify work-related injuries. When accepting the application for work-related injury identification, the Labor Insurance Bureau blindly identified Xiao Yang as an employee of Yufu Company without giving Yufu Company "sufficient time response" in accordance with relevant regulations or even conducting necessary review. In particular, Yufu Company pointed out that Xiao Yang's second-instance effective judgment of foreign-related comprehensive insurance litigation was only issued in June 2007, while the Labor Insurance Bureau actually made the decision to accept Yufu Company as the employer in September, which obviously violated the procedure completely and was "biased".

In fact, as early as in the previous lawsuit, Yufu Company also put forward the view that "Xiao Yang is not an employee of our company", and submitted the subcontract signed with Wang Jia Company, the safety management agreement and the information of Wang Jia Company. Wang Jia Company stated in the explanation that Xiao Yang "was a temporary employee recruited by our company and had a labor relationship with our company when he was injured". Intriguingly, Xiao Yang was injured in September 2006, Wang Jia Company was established in August before, and the subcontract and safety management agreement were signed in July. When the court asked whether the subcontract had been filed, Yufu Company said, "We are a company in Shanghai and the construction site is in Changshu. There are no clear filing requirements in other places, and we have to go back and verify whether it is filed. "

Testimony of workers

Facing the query of Yufu Company, the Labor Insurance Bureau submitted a series of evidences, among which the most striking one was the materials proving the employment relationship between Xiao Yang and Yufu Company, namely, the labor agreement, labor contract, attendance sheet and ID card of construction personnel signed by Xiao Yang and Yufu Company, among which the labor agreement and labor contract were only copies, and Xiao Yang once said in court that "the original contract was taken back by the company at that time". When asked why he signed a "private agreement" with Gao's company, Xiao Yang's attorney said, "At that time, Xiao Yang's father signed it when his son was in danger and threatened, and Xiao Yang's father was not clear about it." The reporter found that regarding this accident agreement, Yufu Company once said in the case of comprehensive foreign insurance that out of humanity, they gave Wang Jia Company 260,000 yuan and paid part of the expenses. "Because it was a taller company, there was no money to deal with the accident at that time."

The Labor Insurance Bureau also provided the witness testimony of Xiao Yang's workers and the investigation records of the Labor Insurance Bureau. A worker said in the investigation record that "we only know Yufu Company, and the helmet and work clothes we wear have Yufu's name on them."

court decision

After two hours of intense trial, the collegial panel made a first-instance judgment after a brief collegial session. The court held that, first of all, whether to pay comprehensive insurance for migrant workers and whether to establish labor relations belong to two categories. In this case, the evidence submitted by Xiao Yang in the application for work-related injury identification was combined with the effective legal documents to form a set of evidence chain. According to these evidences, the defendant's Labor Insurance Bureau found that Xiao Yang had a labor relationship with Yufu Company, which was correct.

Secondly, labor relations should be agreed by the employer and the employee through consultation. In Yufu Company, there is no evidence that Xiao Yang and Xiao Yang have negotiated to terminate the labor relationship. The accident handling agreement signed between Xiao Yang's family and Wang Jia Company cannot change the fact that Xiao Yang and Yufu Company have long-standing labor relations. Therefore, Yufu Company's claim that there is no labor relationship with Yang lacks factual evidence, and the reason cannot be established.

Finally, the court pointed out that it was indeed improper for the labor insurance bureau to send an investigation letter to the plaintiff Yufu Company before accepting the application for work-related injury, but this behavior did not affect the legality of the determination of work-related injury, and the labor insurance bureau should strengthen its procedural awareness in its future work.

To sum up, the court ruled to maintain the conclusion of work-related injury identification made by the defendant's labor insurance bureau.

Dean Ding Shouxing specially reminded that the employment letter needs to be improved.

Why do migrant workers frequently have industrial accidents? Ding Shouxing, the presiding judge of this case, said that in recent years, in the construction market, some construction units did not strictly implement the statutory construction procedures, illegal construction, unlicensed construction, illegal subcontracting or subcontracting of some construction enterprises, unqualified construction, and project managers' affiliation also existed, which led to more serious safety violations at the construction site. In addition, due to the blind price reduction of some owners and the vicious competition of construction enterprises, there is a serious shortage of construction safety funds objectively, construction safety technical measures and safety protection facilities cannot be effectively implemented, and safety management and hidden dangers rectification are neglected during construction, which leads to a high incidence of illegal engineering safety accidents. Therefore, as an enterprise, we must pay attention to standardizing employment, establishing a safety production system, educating and training employees on safety production, strictly putting an end to fatigue and overtime work, and at the same time paying comprehensive insurance for foreigners on time to create a safe production environment for migrant workers from the perspective of social security.

Wang Jiazhen, Director of Labor and Social Security Bureau: Migrant workers should strengthen their awareness of rights protection.

It is difficult for migrant workers to defend their rights. Where is the difficulty? Wang Jiazhen, the defendant in this case, believes that it is the biggest difficulty for migrant workers to protect their rights by not signing labor contracts and retaining evidence. Workers should strengthen their awareness of self-protection, try their best to ensure that they sign labor contracts with employers and ask them to pay social insurance or comprehensive insurance for foreign employees. In the event of an industrial accident, workers should pay attention to the preservation of work permits, attendance cards and other relevant evidence that can prove the factual labor relationship. On the basis of keeping your existing evidence, you should also collect other evidence in time, such as medical record cards, medical expenses and other vouchers. In addition, if the employee finds that the employer has changed its name or refused to issue relevant certificates, he can complain to the local labor administrative supervision department, and if he finds that the employer is suspected of defrauding insurance, he can report it to the public security organ.

Related links: The current situation of "young migrant workers" is worrying.

According to the investigation of relevant departments, young migrant workers with low education, low technology and low ability are increasingly appearing in the building decoration industry, road construction industry, transportation industry, human handling industry and catering service industry with hard working environment and low income, but their working environment is worrying. Regarding the professional inspection of electrician posts, at present, large enterprises basically implement the system of holding certificates, while some small and medium-sized enterprises and even large-scale migrant workers engaged in electrician work basically have no qualification certificates, and their education level is basically below junior high school. I have never been exposed to knowledge and technical training in electric power before employment, but I just follow the work in the process of employment and operate independently for less than 1 month. How it works is not clear at all.

Work fatigue has gradually become the main cause of accidents. Almost every migrant worker has to work overtime. Many people work twice a day without adjusting their rest days, and sometimes even work overtime for several days and nights. In 2004, in a cast iron factory in Wujiang City, a migrant worker accidentally inserted red-hot iron tongs into his companion during fatigue work, causing his companion to die on the spot. Overtime, overwork, no labor contract guarantee, no one to pay the corresponding insurance for them, etc., have all laid hidden dangers for the living conditions of migrant workers.

-

After work, the boss's 70 workers were supported to ask for wages out of thin air.

On128/2007, 165438, the plaintiffs Zhang Xujun, Liu Huajian and other 70 workers were employed by the defendant Chongqing Taishun Garment Co., Ltd. After going to work, the defendant did not sign a written labor contract with the plaintiff and others, only verbally agreed on the monthly salary of the workers, and issued work cards to the plaintiff and others. Unexpectedly, something unexpected happened. Due to the defendant's neglect of management, poor management and heavy debts, he stopped production and business on June 8, 2008. 65 yuan owed the plaintiff and others wages ranging from 8,850 yuan. Just as 70 plaintiffs were about to ask the defendant for hard-earned money, Liu, the boss of the company at home and abroad, heard nothing and made a "out of thin air". The plaintiff and others were helpless and appealed to the court for settlement.

After hearing the case, Yunyang Court of Chongqing held that the plaintiffs Zhang Xujun and Liu Huajian went to work in Chongqing Taishun Garment Co., Ltd., and although the two parties did not sign a written labor contract, the original and defendant agreed on the salary standard and issued a work license plate, which had formed a de facto labor relationship, and the defendant should pay the plaintiff labor remuneration as agreed. The plaintiff and others asked the defendant to pay the arrears of wages, which was in line with the law and the court supported it.

Accordingly, the court ordered the defendant Chongqing Taishun Clothing Co., Ltd. to pay 13 182 1 yuan to the plaintiffs Zhang Xujun, Liu Huajian and other 70 people within 10 days after this judgment came into effect.