In a seemingly ordinary Internet company, a dismissal storm that has attracted widespread attention has quietly risen. The heavy-handed tactics of a high-ranking female official were stunned, and after the video of the dismissal of the employee was exposed, it caused an uproar on the Internet.
The female high-ranking official's name is Jing, and she belongs to a company called "Beijing Nioke Technology Co., Ltd." In the process of dismissing employee Sun, she behaved extremely arrogantly, and even openly declared that she was illegally dismissing employees. This scene was recorded by Sun with a mobile phone and spread on the Internet, attracting widespread attention in a short period of time.
After the incident was exposed, the company quickly issued a statement in response, claiming that the dismissal procedure was legal and compliant, and the two parties had signed an agreement to terminate the labor relationship, and paid the November salary and severance compensation within the specified time. The company seems to be trying to calm public opinion with this statement, but netizens are skeptical about the company's statement.
Netizens questioned the company's reason for dismissal "he is not qualified for this company" is not convincing, especially in the last few days after the end of the internship period, and the dismissal of Sun has caused many questions. It's puzzling why an employee who has been interning at a company for a full six months is told at the end of the internship that he is not up to the task. According to normal logic, the company should not let employees who do not meet the work standards stay until the end of the internship period, because this not only involves a waste of the company's resources, but also may affect the work of other employees. Netizens accused the company of adopting this method as a "prostitution", and at the same time believed that the company's dismissal of Sun was to "open source and reduce expenditure", revealing the company's short-sightedness and lack of long-term planning.
In this incident, in addition to the disgust of Jing's domineering behavior, more people sympathized with Sun. This kind of unfair treatment in the workplace with nowhere to redress is not an isolated case in reality. Some netizens said that this situation occurred largely because the cost of violating the law was too low, or there was no cost at all, which led to the company's disregard for employees.
The incident also exposed some loopholes in the Labour Code. Although the company claimed that the dismissal process was legal and compliant, the revelation of the incident raised concerns about the Labor Law. Workers often feel that they have nowhere to defend their rights in the face of unfair treatment and oppression, which also calls for the improvement of relevant laws and regulations to better protect the rights and interests of workers.
For this kind of company, netizens put forward some suggestions and thoughts. It has been pointed out that such small companies only care about how to save money and squeeze employees through shortcuts, but do not think about the long-term development of the company. They called on those in similar circumstances to leave as soon as possible to avoid further harm.
The reversal of this incident has made public opinion refocus on the rights and interests of ordinary employees in the workplace. The company's dismissal not only calls into question its management, but also triggers a rethinking of the legal system. This may be an opportunity for us to pay more attention to and protect the rights and interests of workers, and at the same time strengthen the supervision and improvement of the law.
As the incident fermented, more and more people expressed their dissatisfaction with Jing, and at the same time questioned the way the entire company operated. Founded in April 2021 and headquartered in Hong Kong, the company is small in scale, but it has attracted much attention because of this labor dispute. Some netizens believe that this kind of short-sighted style of small companies that only cares about immediate interests is destined to lose in market competition. This incident is just the tip of the iceberg and shows that the company has serious management problems.
In the comments of netizens, some people lamented the "white prostitution" behavior during the internship period, thinking that the company used the low internship salary to make Sun make great efforts for the company in the past six months, but he was finally treated like this. This contradictory phenomenon has led to a deep reflection on the management of the company.
In addition to criticism of the company, netizens also expressed deep sympathy for Sun. After six months of internship, I learned that I was not qualified for the job, which raised questions about the company's recruitment and training system. If Sun is really incompetent, why didn't the company make adjustments at an early stage, but let him waste six months in vain? This seemingly aimless dismissal is incomprehensible and raises questions about the company's management.
For the company's statement, netizens did not fully accept it. The company claims to have paid November wages and severance payments as agreed, but many have questioned whether this is really reasonable. Some netizens believe that the company's previous inappropriate remarks have brought irreparable damage to Sun, and this money is far from making up for the unfair treatment he has suffered. There were calls for greater regulation of corporate conduct to ensure the fairness of dismissal procedures.
This incident has caused more than one wave of public opinion, which has made people more concerned about the protection of rights and interests in the workplace. Workers should be treated fairly at work, and should not fall victim to the company's pursuit of short-term profits. The fermentation of the incident has also given rise to expectations for the Labor Law, hoping that the relevant laws will be more perfect, better protect the rights and interests of workers, and prevent the recurrence of similar incidents.
This incident is undoubtedly a cautionary tale for those who have been treated unfairly in the workplace. The supervision and attention of public opinion may be able to promote the company's self-examination and improvement in management. It is hoped that this incident will attract wider attention, promote social concern for the protection of rights and interests in the workplace, and strengthen the supervision of corporate behavior to ensure that workers can work and survive in a fair and equal environment.