I have been insured for three months because of the company's mistake before. What should I do for help? It is urgent.

When I left the original company, I was insured for three months because of my own mistakes, and I had to bear it by the unit itself. Beijing Jinghai-Tianjin Jinghai asked employees for money after paying social security for more than two years, and the court ignored it. Beijing Jinghaiyi Electromechanical Equipment Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Jinghaiyi Hydraulic Control Technology Co., Ltd.

Labor arbitration and courts

None of them accepted the lawsuit of Beijing Jinghai-Tianjin Jinghai-social security payment.

Article 1 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases stipulates that the people's court shall accept the lawsuit brought by the employer who fails to go through the social insurance formalities for the employee and the social insurance agency can't make up for it, resulting in his inability to enjoy social insurance benefits. Article 6 of the Labor Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Law stipulates: "In the event of a labor dispute, the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their claims. If the evidence related to the disputed matter belongs to the management of the employer, the employer shall provide it; If the employer does not provide it, it shall bear the adverse consequences. " As far as the burden of proof is concerned, it is a legal fact that social security agencies cannot complete social security procedures. According to the relevant laws and regulations, the burden of proof based on this legal fact should be borne by the workers. However, if a worker applies for a written certificate from the social security department, the social security department will generally not issue such materials. If it is harsh on workers and refuses to accept them, it will not be conducive to protecting the legitimate rights and interests of workers. Therefore, as long as the laborer can prove that the employer has not gone through the social insurance formalities for him, it can cause his losses. As for the responsibility of proving whether the social security agency can reissue it, it should not be regarded as the acceptance standard. If the employer can prove that the social security agency can make up for it, the people's court shall not accept the labor dispute, but shall inform the laborer to apply to the labor administrative department for settlement.

In practice, the details are as follows: 1. Disputes over work-related injury treatment caused by the employer's failure to purchase work-related injury insurance belong to the scope of accepting labor disputes; 2, the employer did not participate in unemployment, maternity, medical insurance, the employer shall bear the liability for compensation for treatment losses. As for the loss of treatment caused by the failure to pay unemployment insurance, maternity insurance and medical insurance in full and on time, it should not be accepted at present because there are no laws and regulations that clearly stipulate that it belongs to the scope of accepting labor disputes. 3. There are two restrictions for people's courts to hear the loss of pension insurance benefits: first, workers must reach retirement age, and second, employers have not participated in social insurance co-ordination. With the deepening of the reform of the social basic old-age insurance system, the old-age insurance can basically be repaid, and there will be fewer and fewer disputes over the loss of such treatment.

There are three kinds of disputes related to social security. First, the payment and return of social insurance premiums are controversial, which is controversial in practice. The author believes that if there is no dispute between the two parties on the payment base, the social insurance premium paid by the employer on behalf of employees or employees on behalf of the employer belongs to pure labor creditor's rights and debts, which should be regarded as the scope of acceptance of labor disputes. The second is the dispute arising from the agreement between the two parties to pay a certain amount to avoid the obligation to pay social insurance premiums. The author thinks that disputes arising from this agreement should be accepted as labor cases, but this agreement should be deemed invalid. If the employer has already paid, it may request the return; If the employer fails to pay, the laborer cannot ask for the return. The third is the enterprise annuity dispute. In essence, enterprise annuity is not a social endowment insurance that enterprises are not allowed to buy, but a welfare treatment for employees. Welfare treatment dispute is a kind of labor dispute, so enterprise annuity dispute should also be regarded as the scope of labor dispute arbitration and litigation.