Corporate Debate Contest Topics An employee who is often late but does a good job cannot be fired

The positive view can be expelled:

1. Most people who are not punctual will not be very responsible.

2. Punctuality means that the employee's attitude is not serious, even if the work is excellent, but that is not his complete strength.

3. Punctuality shows that he despises the company's management system, and not severely punishing it is greatly detrimental to the company's management.

Opposing views cannot be expelled:

1. There may be special reasons for frequent tardiness, such as late overtime each time, inconvenient transportation, etc.

2. Excellent work proves his value to the company, as long as an employee has enough value to the company, he is a good employee.

3. The best management system is to let everyone give full play to their abilities to create the best benefits, rather than the dead working time and rules.

Oppose: Don't expel you.

Being often late can be detrimental to the company's image, but it is also a way to show your attitude towards work. It can be warned and controlled, and employees and business leaders need to communicate and exchange frequently, so as to promote the improvement of the company's overall efficiency. Find out the cause in taking the relevant help or warning.

Excellent work shows that his strength is still worthy of people's recognition or recognition, and it also has a certain contribution to the company. After all, everything depends on strength, and the company is operating normally to bring benefits to the society and the country at the same time, and its own profit is the purpose. We need strong and pragmatic employees.

Yes. Because a good employee must first have a sense of time and professionalism. If you don't have a sense of time, you won't be a great employee.

This question is a bit focused on "excellent", but it really depends on our attitude towards the problem, and I will only take the opposite view for now

1. Excellent work shows that he still loves his job very much, is very interested in the problems at work, and a person will work hard when he is interested!

2. If he is late, there may be something delayed, it may be a work problem, it may be a life problem, etc. However, a "often" indication that he really has a problem! It is necessary to find out what he is really late for; Or did he do it on purpose, and if it was intentional, then it should be even more clear why, which party is the reason!

Find a better way to fix it! This retains a talent.

Oppose: Cannot be expelled.

Whether the criteria for dismissal are in line with the ultimate goal of the enterprise.

The ultimate goal of the enterprise is to obtain profits, and everything that meets or can achieve this goal needs to be maintained. An employee who does a good job can bring benefits to the business, and other aspects can loosen the boundaries.

It is possible to expel because people who do not have a sense of time are not good.

If the employee is in the internship period, the company can dismiss him if he is late for many times, then if the employee signs a work contract and the company wants to dismiss her, it is likely to compensate some breach of contract fees.

If your company has regulations, and you can be persuaded to quit after how many times you have established rules and regulations, then the company can indeed dismiss him after it reaches the number of times.

OK! There are no rules, the company has the company's rules and regulations, if the regulations are repeatedly violated, the company has the right to dismiss and dismiss.

If an employee is late for many times, the company must decide to dismiss an employee who has passed the labor union or the "Employee Handbook" that has been in place in the past (the "Employee Handbook" mentioned here has been signed by the employee at the time of entry as a prerequisite) and the definition of tardiness (which is the best way to avoid labor arbitration and litigation in the future).

When the Employee Handbook stipulates that being late three times a month, or five times in total, is considered a "serious violation of labor discipline", then the employee can be terminated immediately in accordance with Article 39 of the Labor Contract Law (there is no word for dismissal).

Yes, you can be dismissed for violating the labor contract.

It's just a bit far-fetched to be late.

A: Yes.

Original by Guangdong Mokin Law Firm.

If you arrive late and leave early for multiple times, can you accumulate the number of days of absenteeism and terminate the labor relationship in accordance with the rules and regulations.

Brief facts of the case. Mr. Yang joined Company B in October 1999 as a cashier. Between September 2012 and January 2013, Yang was seriously absent from work, arriving late for a total of 25 times, leaving early 7 times, failing to punch in according to his fingerprints 95 times, and being absent from work for more than 15 days in a year.

On January 18, 2013, Company B notified Mr. Yang to terminate the employment relationship on the grounds of serious violations, and Mr. Yang applied for arbitration on April 2, 2013, but refused to comply with the arbitral award and filed a lawsuit with the court on January 8, 2013.

Litigation Claims. Company B was requested to pay Yang RMB in compensation for illegally terminating the labor contract.

Referee thinking. In this case, based on the reasons for the appellant Yang's appeal and the appellee's company B's defense, the main focus of the dispute in the second instance was whether the termination of the labor contract relationship between company B and Yang was legal.

1. The labor contract is valid, and both parties enjoy their respective rights and assume corresponding obligations.

In this case, Mr. Yang and Company B signed an indefinite-term employment contract with Mr. Yang in 2009, and since Company B signed an indefinite employment contract with Mr. Yang, in accordance with the terms of the employment contract, both parties enjoyed their respective rights and assumed corresponding obligations.

If the worker provides labor services to the employer, the worker shall abide by the rules and regulations of the employer, and the employer shall pay the corresponding remuneration to the employee and provide a safe working environment. The employment contract is legally binding on both parties.

2. The employee's behavior constitutes a serious violation.

Due to Yang's serious absence from work and labor from September 2012 to January 2013, he was late for a total of 25 times, left early 7 times, and failed to punch in according to his fingerprint 95 times, of which 22 times he was late in 2012, left early 7 times, and failed to punch in according to his fingerprint 82 times, and the cumulative absenteeism has exceeded 15 days in one year.

Therefore, Yang's behavior violated Article 8 of the rules and regulations of Company B, which states that "if an employee has any of the following circumstances, it shall be treated as absenteeism......; If an employee is absent from work for 7 consecutive working days or 15 working days in total within one year, the credit union shall terminate the labor contract relationship with him".

To sum up, Company B's request to terminate the labor contract relationship with Yang is based on the law, and complies with Article 39, Paragraph 3, Subparagraphs (2) and (3) of the Labor Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, which states that "the employer may terminate the labor contract if the employee has any of the following circumstances: (2) the employee seriously violates the rules and regulations of the employer."

Verdict. The plaintiff's claim was dismissed.

If there is a relevant attendance system, in this case, it is still necessary to follow the system, because humanized management can no longer work on him, or it can also be considered for the full attendance of employees, corresponding rewards, which may play a certain role in incentives.

Our company's approach: our company is also in the initial entrepreneurial period, more humanized management, but after a period of development, employees began to appear for work more news, especially during working hours, often late phenomenon, at this time, the company leaders said to introduce a penalty system, after the introduction of the penalty system, the phenomenon of tardiness has not been alleviated accordingly, and then the company set up a full attendance award, after the appearance of the full attendance award, the phenomenon of late has been significantly alleviated, And the phenomenon of coming to take leave is much less, and it seems that sometimes appropriate rewards are also very effective for human resource management.

Of course, the recruitment of employees is to bring profits to the company, less time to produce a few fewer products, the boss's profit will be less or increase the company's cost, the boss's profit will be less than the employees who are often late, why are they late? Without a view of time, the concept of discipline may be an employee's own factor. Or the incompetence of the direct leadership.

Unmotivated employees have an impact on both the work and the collective, and if you are the leader, what will you think if everyone is late.

Positive: Repeated.

Potential creates heroes Anti: Heroes create the current situation, this question can be both profound and very basic: fairness is more important than efficiency Negative: efficiency is more important than fairness, and it is also a basic question, but it can be linked to everyone's reality, and it is also very good.

There's a lot more, if these two can't, let's talk about it, I hope it can help you.

Is it correct for those who work hard to govern people, and for those who work hard to govern people in contemporary times?

Does modern enterprise management need a generalist or a special edition? Money is the root of all evil, and power and money are the first of all things.

Which is more important, business revitalization, talent or money?

Enterprise development, positive: no suspicion of employing people, no suspicion of doubt; Opposite: Suspicious of employing people, and using suspicious people.

The aroma of wine is not afraid of deep alleys, and it is not equally applicable in the development of enterprises.

The company's recruitment is based on talent or morality.

Is it necessary to memorize the employee handbook? Is memorizing an employee handbook good or bad for the quality improvement of employees?

If it cannot be dismissed, it shall be removed.

Article 18 of the Regulations on Rewards and Punishments for Employees of Enterprises stipulates: "If an employee is absent from work frequently without justifiable reasons, and after criticism and education is ineffective, the employee is absent from work for more than 15 consecutive days, or the cumulative absenteeism time exceeds 30 days within one year, the enterprise has the right to remove the employee."

Yes, but there must be a legal and reasonable system. Give someone a way and remove the name.

What do you want such a person to do? Straight dismissal, there is such a job not to do, think about the current employment situation. There are a lot of talents.

Should the value realization of employees be based on self-effort or the creation of opportunities by the enterprise;

I am the boss and will choose Sun Wukong Zhu Bajie as an employee;

In contemporary society, men are more tired or women are more tired;

Should Yu Gong move mountains or move houses;

The criterion of good and evil is the effect or the motive;

Safety production is more important than rewards or punishments;

The key to the development of an enterprise is individual ability or unity and cooperation;

Enterprises employ people to talent first or morality first;

Since it is within the company, it should be related to enterprise management, professional, and get along with colleagues, this kind of work, close to work, significant, and easier for employees to get started. Office romance, the pros outweigh the cons or the disadvantages outweigh the pros; Enterprise employment, generalist or specialist;

Is it better to give bonuses or organize activities such as travel for year-end rewards?

It is not advisable to delve into the definition of fines mentioned by the two upstairs, or to discuss whether the company has the power to impose fines, which will be very boring and purely become a play on words.

Both sides can work on how to promote the effective implementation of the system, such as whether fines can promote the implementation of the system, whether fines are the most effective means to promote the implementation of the system, and whether the definition or legal aspects are involved, which also makes the debate a little meaningful.

For the opposing side, the soldiers will come to block, and the water will cover the earth.

I'm not sure if this kind of argument is a stealing of the topic, but I think you opponents should still start from the "for the implementation of the system, there is a more effective way than fines" to argue, although it seems to be a bit biased from the debate, but it will be recognized by your leaders, after all, enterprises are not engaged in academics, and this game is not a hero to win or lose.

Argument from three major aspects, and argumentation.

1.The effective implementation of the system can be promoted by the innovation of system formulation.

2.The training, publicity, and innovation of the system can promote the effective implementation of the system.

3.The innovation of system implementation supervision can promote the effective implementation of the system.

These three aspects seem to be empty, so you need to give full play to your wisdom and wisdom, collect a lot of arguments for each link, simply put, it is to seriously think about whether there is an innovative method in each link, for example, in the process of formulating the system, think about how to improve the rationality and enforceability of the system documents, combined with your current methods are better, and then a little more detailed, such as the production of training courseware of the system, the training of lecturers to teach skills, etc., the more detailed the better. But it is better to be organized, and it is better to combine representative examples.

For the positive side, it is very helpless that they must play a little word game, otherwise they will be completely dragged away by the opposite side, but if you think about it, the positive side of this game is actually a supporting role, the protagonist lies in the opposite side, and the positive side needs to play a negative role that makes people feel very reasonable, to pave the way for the wonderful performance of the opposite side. After thinking about it, the positive side can collect a large number of practices of large enterprises with ineffective implementation of systems and strict management rewards and punishments to validate their own views, which will cause a little trouble for the positive side, because if you play the game completely according to your own arguments, the debate will be less fun, so the opponent can respond appropriately to the questions raised by the positive side.

"Our argument is that you should not be fined for violating the company's system."

So, what should be done if you shouldn't be fined?

Our foothold is: [Violation of the company system, should be punished, but the penalty is not the money].

If you violate the company system and you are only fined, then as long as you have money, can you violate the company system at will?

The company's system stipulates that business secrets shall not be disclosed, OK, anyway, I have money, admit punishment, what can you do with me?

If you deal with it in this way, the company will have problems sooner or later.

The company's policy is formulated for everyone to abide by, and it is best that everyone does not violate it.

If there is a violation, it should be punished, and what is the purpose of the punishment? It is that no one will do it again.

A fine will make everyone stop committing it? Every mistake can be solved by a fine?

Fines, is it really a panacea? Cure-all?

Our point of view, repeated: [violation of the system should be punished, but the penalty is not the money].

There are many forms of fines, but fines are by no means the only way, nor are they necessarily the best way!!

Different degrees and different types of violations of the system should be dealt with in the form of corresponding punishments.

For example, as mentioned earlier, if the company's core secrets are leaked, they should be fired.

If it is only a violation of the attendance system of late arrival and early departure, it should not be fined, and the attendance bonus will be deducted according to the regulations.

Speaking of which, I would like to remind you that economic penalties and fines, our side should make a slight distinction, deducting wages and bonuses, which is a financial punishment, and a slight distinction between fines, if the other party also deducts wages as fines, our foothold will be encroached upon).

Fines, in fact, are an administrative means, and now even if they want to be fined, they must be fined only after the unit with administrative law enforcement powers issues relevant certificates.

A company can fine people casually?

Therefore, we say that fines should be punished, but they should not rely on fines, which may be the most effective, but they cannot achieve the ultimate goal.