One, at least two months before the relocation to the employees of the location of the relocation and the company's views on the placement of employees.
Employees, after receiving the company's relocation notice, need to consider whether to accept the new workplace, as well as the impact of the new workplace on commuting and life. If the employee needs to ask the company to leave after the inspection, then the employee should be given a certain amount of time to hand over the work. Article 37 of the Labor Contract Law provides that a laborer may terminate an employment contract by notifying the employer in writing thirty days in advance. Workers can terminate the labor contract by notifying the employer three days in advance during the probationary period. In other words, it is better for enterprises to give their employees time in advance, otherwise, once the employees leave, it will affect the normal handover of work. Responsible, if due to the hasty relocation of the enterprise, the employee, even if not 30 days in advance of the proposed departure, does not constitute a violation of the law.
I. The impact on the employee's commuting time should be fully assessed.
Generally speaking, the relocation of the same city generally does not have a major impact on the employees, but also to be assessed separately, if in a county or a smaller city, may not cause a major impact, but if similar to Beijing, Shanghai, such a big city, the impact is still very large. In judicial practice, the employee commuting time within half an hour, are not considered to the employee's commuting and life brought about by the major impact, generally supportive of the enterprise. If the time is more than forty minutes, generally speaking, will bring a big impact on the employee's commute.
Two, if the employee proposed to leave, whether the enterprise needs to compensate the employee.
Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law stipulates that in one of the following cases, the employer may terminate the labor contract after giving thirty days' notice in writing to the worker or paying the worker an additional one month's salary: (a) the worker is sick or injured not due to work, and after the expiration of the prescribed medical treatment period, the worker cannot engage in the original work, nor can he engage in the work which is arranged separately by the employer; (b) the worker is ill or injured not due to work, and cannot engage in the work which is arranged separately by the employer. (ii) the worker is unable to perform the job, and after training or adjusting the job position, he or she is still unable to perform the job; (iii) the labor contract is concluded on the basis of the objective situation has changed significantly, making it impossible to perform the labor contract, and after consultation between the employer and the worker, failed to reach an agreement to change the content of the labor contract.
Whether the enterprise needs to compensate the employee, we have to judge whether it is in line with the provisions of Article 40 of the Labor Contract Law, "whether there is a significant change in the objective circumstances on which the labor contract was concluded.
If the company responds to the government's call to relocate, or if the company's office address is demolished, the company does not need to compensate the employee for the significant change in the objective circumstances. If the employee chooses to leave, only in accordance with the employee's years of service to the employee compensation can be. If the enterprise just to enjoy in order to expand the office address or in order to save office costs and choose to relocate, does not belong to the objective circumstances have changed significantly, the relocation if caused by the employee's commuting costs increased a lot, but, if the enterprise provides the corresponding remedies, such as the provision of shuttle buses or to provide transportation subsidies, the employee chooses a more convenient means of travel and does not have too much impact on the commuting time. However, if the employee chooses a more convenient mode of transportation that does not affect the commuting time too much, it is still not considered a violation of the agreement.