HR Legal Corner: Work injury certificates that have not been revoked can also be counted.
Published:
2021-03-22
case introduction]
Liu is a company after-sales service personnel, during the period of employment to participate in social insurance. At the end of April 2016, when Liu was entrusted to replace the water pipe for the product user, he accidentally injured his eye. Because Liu's work is a personal act and is not assigned by a company, he does not meet the conditions for work-related injury identification. In order to enjoy the treatment of industrial injury insurance, Liu and his wife, citing family difficulties, implored a company to cooperate in the declaration of industrial injury. In order to eliminate the concerns of the unit, Liu issued a letter of commitment to a company, stating that eye injuries were caused by personal reasons during the work arranged by the non-unit at the end of April 2016. I and my family apply for the company's assistance in reporting work injury identification, disability assessment and reimbursement related matters. In view of the fact that this accident is caused by personal behavior and has nothing to do with the company, the individual is responsible for the later treatment, related responsibilities and losses, and guarantees that the company will not be held accountable and compensated in any form. In July 2016, Liu was identified as a work-related injury by the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau and was identified as a Grade 6 disability. Liu returned to work for more than 10 days after the treatment of his injury, during which he wrote an application with the same meaning, and then terminated the labor relationship with a company.
In June 2017, Liu applied for labor dispute arbitration, requiring a company to pay a one-time disability subsidy, a one-time medical subsidy, a one-time employment subsidy, a salary for work stoppage, medical expenses, hospital food subsidies, nursing fees, etc. A total of more than 300,000 yuan. After hearing the case, the Labor Arbitration Commission supported some of Liu's claims. Both parties appealed to the people's court if they did not accept the verdict.
focus of controversy]
The focus of the dispute in this case is whether a company should pay Liu for various expenses arising from work-related injuries.
1, Liu's point of view
The undertaking involved in the case was drafted in advance by a company. The content is not true and is not my true intention. Because I was worried that the company would not reimburse the medical expenses, I had to sign the undertaking to solve the worries of medical treatment, so the undertaking was illegal and invalid. I have been identified as a work-related injury, a company should go through the procedures for receiving work-related injury insurance benefits for me, and pay the various expenses that the employer should bear in accordance with the law.
2, a company's point of view
The existing evidence can prove that Liu was injured in the process of doing private work, not in the work of the unit, which does not meet the basic requirements of industrial injury identification. At that time, out of pity, the respondent was soft-hearted and issued the work-related injury identification materials for the appellant, thus producing the work-related injury identification certificate in this case. However, the relevant materials on which the work-related injury was determined to be false materials, so Liu had no right to require the unit to pay the work-related injury treatment.
judgment result]
The case was heard by the third-level court, and the court held that Liu's handwritten application after returning to work made a clear statement, and the evidence submitted was not sufficient to prove that the letter of commitment was coerced. According to the provisions of Article 114 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, the letter of commitment and application issued by Liu were sufficient to overturn the determination of work-related injuries, and Liu's claim was rejected.
legal analysis]
The work-related injury certificate is the premise and basis for workers to enjoy the treatment of work-related injuries. If they are not satisfied with the results of the work-related injury determination, most employers will request the cancellation of the work-related injury certificate through administrative reconsideration or administrative litigation. When Liu applied for labor dispute arbitration in this case, although a company wanted to get rid of the shackles of the result of the work-related injury determination, it was unable to effectively exercise the right relief through administrative reconsideration or administrative litigation because it exceeded the legal time limit for revocation of the work-related injury determination. In the case that the work injury certificate has been legally effective, most people think that it is difficult for a company to be exempted from the liability for the payment of work injury benefits.
The Supreme People's Court on the application<中华人民共和国民事诉讼法>Article 114 of the interpretation of certain issues stipulates that the matters recorded in the documents produced by state organs or other organizations with social management functions in accordance with the law shall be presumed to be true, except where there is evidence to the contrary.
According to the above judicial interpretation, the court found that the evidence provided by a company in the lawsuit was sufficient to overturn the work-related injury matters recorded in the work-related injury certificate, thus exempting a company from the responsibility of paying hundreds of thousands of yuan of work-related injury treatment. Liu also because of greed, because of his litigation behavior exposed the false facts of work-related injuries, resulting in the failure of part of the work-related injury insurance benefits that he could have enjoyed.
Key words:
Related News
Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Region
Address: Floor 55-57, Jinan China Resources Center, 11111 Jingshi Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province
