Beijing Municipality

[field_geographical_location_1]

Domestic Case Law

邓亚娟邓与北京手挽手劳务派遣有限责任公司一般人格权纠纷,北京市第三中级人民法院 (Deng v. Beijing Shouwanshou Co. Ltd.) No. 3 Intermediate People's Court of Beijing Municipality (2016)

Employment discrimination, Gender discrimination

The plaintiff sued the defendants for infringing on her equal employment rights. The plaintiff alleged that the job description for the courier position included: “Eligibility: Men.”  When Deng went for an interview, she was advised that “we never have women couriers.”  She was subsequently informed that Beijing Postal could not authorize an employment contract for her because she is female. The plaintiff requested relief of, among other things, an official apology and 50,000 Chinese yuan as compensation of for mental distress.  The court of first instance held that the defendants infringed upon the plaintiff’s right of employment equality under the People’s Republic of China’s Employment Law. The Court also rejected the defendants’ argument that the courier position fit within the statutory exceptions under “Special Regulations on Protection of Female Workers,” which prohibits female workers from working in certain fields involving heavy manual labor. The Court of first instance awarded 2,000 Chinese yuan as compensation for mental distress but denied the request for an official apology. Both the plaintiff and defendants appealed.  The Intermediate People’s Court affirmed the lower court’s determination that a courier does not fit within the statutory exceptions for positions “unsuitable for women.” The court also held that compensation of 2,000 Chinese yuan was commensurate with the damages suffered by the plaintiff, and that there was insufficient ground to require an official apology from the defendants to the plaintiff.

就业歧视、性别歧视

原告诉称被告侵犯了她与男子平等的就业权利。原告称被告公司招聘快递员广告的任职资格为“男”。在原告到被告公司面试时,被告人事部称:“我们这儿从来没有过女快递员。”之后被告公司称因为原告是女性所以总公司(邮政公司)不批准签合同。原告的诉讼请求包括被告进行书面赔礼道歉和精神损害抚慰金人民币50000元。原审法院认为根据《中华人民共和国劳动法》,被告侵犯了原告与男子平等的就业权利。被告辩称快递员职位属于《女职工劳动保护特别规定》下禁止女性从事的体力劳动。原审法院驳回了被告的辩解。原审法院判决被告赔偿原告精神损害抚慰金2000元,并驳回了原告要求被告赔礼道歉的诉讼请求。原告与被告均不服原审判决并提起上诉。中级人民法院维持了原审法院的判决,认为快递员职位不属于法律禁止女性从事的体力劳动。中级人民法院认为精神损害抚慰金2000元和原告受到的伤害程度能够匹配,而书面赔礼道歉的要求依据不足。