She joined the company. Both parties sign an open-ended labor contract. The factory will be moved. The company and employees negotiate and put forward two schemes: one is to terminate the labor contract between the two parties, and the company will pay economic compensation according to the corresponding working years; Second, the company provides shuttle bus service for employees working in the new factory. The company decided to cancel the commuter bus and replace it with a transportation subsidy. She mailed a notice of termination of the labor contract to the company and appealed to the court for compensation of 32,498 yuan.
? During the trial, A Juan said, "I have no car. I have been taking the commuter bus for the past two years. Now I say it will take three or four hours to cancel and go to work by bus. If I encounter bad weather, I must spend more time on the road, which will bring serious problems to my normal work and life. " A Juan thinks that the transportation subsidy promised by the company for 18 yuan can't make up for her actual expenses and time cost if she wants to ensure that she can go to work on time. She believes that the company's cancellation of the shuttle bus violates the agreement between the two parties and belongs to the situation of "not providing working conditions as agreed in the labor contract". In addition, regular buses should not be a necessary working condition. In addition, the labor contract signed by both parties does not clearly stipulate the need to provide regular buses for workers. "Before deciding to cancel the commuter bus, the company organized relevant personnel to negotiate many times and got the consent of the vast majority of employees. Only the plaintiff disagreed with 14 employees involved. " The company said.
? The court held that the signing of the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was the true intention of both parties, which was in compliance with the law and should be legal and effective, and both parties should perform according to the contract. In this case, the defendant moved the plaintiff's original work place from Wuzhong District to Science and Technology City, which was clearly stipulated in the contract between the two parties. When both parties signed the labor contract, the objective situation did not change significantly. The court held that the defendant voluntarily provided shuttle service for employees involved in changing the workplace, which belonged to the company's independent arrangement of production and business activities. The defendant subsequently canceled the commuter bus service and provided transportation subsidies to the relevant personnel. Accordingly, the court did not support the plaintiff's claim to ask the defendant to pay economic compensation according to law, and ruled that the plaintiff's claim was rejected.
In this case, the plaintiff's claim that the defendant's cancellation of the shuttle bus belongs to "failure to provide working conditions as agreed in the labor contract" has no factual basis. Even if it is true, it is reasonable for the defendant to cancel the shuttle bus and pay transportation subsidies.