云南弘石律师事务所,弘石律师,弘石律师事务所,律师事务所

新闻中心

搜索

　当前的位置：首页 > 新闻中心 > 弘石动态弘石动态

法律帮手（双语）丨不同意用人单位变更工作岗位，劳动者应当如何处理？

发布人：汪卫平、李雨珂 | 转贴自：本站原创 | 阅读：298 | 更新时间：2023/4/21

一、问题

用人单位安排劳动者到其他地方、其他岗位工作，劳动者不愿意调整工作地点及工作岗位的，应当如何应对？

二、结论

虽然总体上《劳动法》《劳动合同法》等相关法律法规对劳动者实行倾斜保护，但在立法上和司法实践中也要同时平衡劳动者的劳动权益与用人单位的用工权益。因此，对于用人单位对劳动者工作地点、工作岗位的合理调整，建议劳动者尽可能理解、支持与配合。如果劳动者自身情况确实难以满足用人单位的工作地点或岗位调整要求，或者用人单位的调整没有合理、正当理由，存在恶意，则劳动者应当依法、理性维权。第一，劳动者可以通过书面方式，说明自己的客观情况以及不愿意变更工作地点、工作岗位的意愿及原因，请单位不予变更劳动合同。第二，要有效管理《最高人民法院关于审理劳动争议案件适用法律问题的解释（一）》【法释〔2020〕26号】所规定的劳动合同口头变更的法律风险。第三，需要有效管理用人单位依据《劳动合同法》第四十条第（三）项规定与劳动者解除劳动合同的法律风险。第四，劳动者即使不同意岗位变更，不到新工作岗位报到，也应当到原工作岗位正常上班，以免构成严重违反用人单位规章制度，促成用人单位行使劳动合同的单方解除权。

三、法律分析

（一）调整工作地点及工作岗位的法律性质是对劳动合同的变更。

根据《劳动合同法》第十七条第（四）项，工作内容和工作地点是劳动合同的必备条款之一，若用人单位调整劳动者的工作岗位和工作地点则构成对劳动合同内容的变更。根据《劳动合同法》第三十五条，“用人单位与劳动者协商一致，可以变更劳动合同约定的内容。变更劳动合同，应当采用书面形式。”因此，若用人单位拟调整劳动者的工作岗位、工作地点的，应当与劳动者协商，征询其意见，双方协商一致后，应当签订补充协议或另行签订劳动合同，通过书面形式变更劳动合同。

（二）劳动者不同意劳动合同变更的，如果符合《劳动合同法》第四十条第（三）项规定的法定情形，用人单位可以解除劳动合同。

根据《劳动合同法》第四十条第（三）项，劳动合同订立时所依据的客观情况发生重大变化，致使劳动合同无法履行，经用人单位与劳动者协商，未能就变更劳动合同内容达成协议的，用人单位提前三十日以书面形式通知劳动者本人或者额外支付劳动者一个月工资后，可以解除劳动合同。根据该法第四十六条第（三）项，用人单位依照前述规定解除劳动合同的，应当向劳动者支付经济补偿金。因此，在劳动合同订立时所依据的客观情况发生重大变化的情况下，用人单位拟调整劳动者的工作岗位及工作地点，但劳动者不同意，则用人单位享有单方解除劳动合同的权利。若用人单位以此为由解除劳动合同的，一般情况下，劳动者则难以有效抗辩。当然，劳动者可以依法主张《劳动合同法》第四十六条规定的经济补偿金。

（三）变更劳动合同没有采用书面形式的，并非一律不受法律保护。

《最高人民法院关于审理劳动争议案件适用法律问题的解释（一）》【法释〔2020〕26号】第四十三条规定，“用人单位与劳动者协商一致变更劳动合同，虽未采用书面形式，但已经实际履行了口头变更的劳动合同超过一个月，变更后的劳动合同内容不违反法律、行政法规且不违背公序良俗，当事人以未采用书面形式为由主张劳动合同变更无效的，人民法院不予支持。”换句话说，在双方口头协商一致变更劳动合同且该变更劳动合同的口头协议已经实际履行超过一个月的，劳动者不得仅仅以没有签订书面变更协议为由而反悔。因此，劳动者确实不愿意变更工作地点、工作岗位的，为避免被认定为口头协议变更并被裁判机关支持，第一，可以考虑不到新的工作地点、工作岗位上班，第二，可以要求单位出具书面材料证明该劳动合同变更违反劳动者意愿，劳动者保留后续维权的权利。

（四）劳动者不同意劳动合同变更的，不可以不再到用人单位上班且不履行任何请假手续。

由于双方劳动合同并未解除，仍然对双方当事人具有约束力，因此，即使劳动者不同意劳动合同变更，也不能以旷工等方式自行中止履行劳动合同，而是应当继续到原岗位正常提供劳动或者根据前述建议到新的工作地点、工作岗位上班，否则，将面临严重的旷工法律风险。如果劳动者非因自己的原因而未能在原来的工作地点、工作岗位提供正常劳动，劳动者应当形成和保留相应的证据，以备后续维权所需。若劳动者旷工构成严重违反用人单位规章制度的，用人单位可依据《劳动合同法》第三十九条第（二）项的规定，行使单方解除权，与劳动者解除劳动合同且无需支付经济补偿金。参考案例：经办案例丨职工以维权信访为由旷工，单位可依法解除劳动合同（点击阅读）。

Helper丨What Should the Employee Do if He Disagrees With the Employing Entity's Proposal to Change His Job Position?

Questions

When the employing entity intends to arrange the employee to another position or workplace but the employee is reluctant, how the employee deal with it?

Conclusion

Although relevant laws and regulations such as the Labor Law and the Labor Contract Law in general are tilted to protect the employee, it is also necessary to balance the labor rights and interests of the employee with the employment rights and interests of the employing entity, in the legislation and judicial practice. Therefore, it is recommended that the employee understands, supports and cooperates as much as possible with the employing entity's reasonable adjustment of his workplace and work position. If the employee's situation is really difficult to meet the employing entity's workplace or job adjustment requirements, or if the employing entity's adjustment has no reasonable and justifiable reasons and malice exists, the employee should defend his rights and interests according to the law and in a rational manner. Firstly, the employee can explain objective situation and reluctance to change his position or workplace in writing and request that the employing entity not modify the labor contract. Secondly, it is necessary to effectively manage the legal risks of oral modifications to labor contracts as stipulated in the Interpretation (I) of the Supreme People's Court of Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases 【No. 26 [2020] Interpretation of the SPC】. Thirdly, it is necessary to effectively manage the legal risks associated with the employing entity's dissolution of labor contracts with the employee according to Article 40 (3) of the Labor Contract Law. Fourthly, even if the employee disagrees with the change in work position, he should also back to the original work position to check-in for normal work, so as not to constitute serious violations of the employing entity's rules and regulations, resulting in the employing entity dissolving the labor contract by exercising the unilateral dissolution right.

Legal Analysis

(a)The legal nature of adjusting workplace and position is labor contract modification.

According to Article 17(4) of the Labor Contract Law, the work content and workplace are one of the necessary provisions of the labor contract. If the employing entity intends to adjust the work position and workplace of the employee, it will constitute a modification in the content of the labor contract. According to Article 35 of the Labor Contract Law, "An employing entity and an employee may modify the contents stipulated in the labor contract if they so agree upon negotiations. The modifications to the labor contract shall be made in writing." Therefore, if the employing entity intends to adjust the employee's work position or workplace, it should consult with the employee and seek his opinion. After reaching a common consensus, both parties should sign a supplementary agreement or a new contract to change the labor contract in writing.

（b）If the employee does not agree to the modifications of the labor contract, the employing entity may dissolve the labor contract if it meets the statutory circumstances stipulated in Article 40, item 3 of the Labor Contract Law.

According to Article 40(3) of the Labor Contract Law, if the objective situations on which the labor contract was based have changed considerably to the extent that the labor contract cannot be performed, and the employing entity and the employee cannot reach an agreement on modifying the content of the labor contract after negotiation, the employing entity may dissolve the labor contract by notifying the employee in writing 30 days in advance or by paying the employee an extra-month's wages. According to Article 46(3) of this law that if the employing entity dissolves the labor contract according to the above provisions, it shall pay economic compensation to the employee. Therefore, if the objective situations on which the labor contract was based have changed considerably, the employing entity may propose to adjust the employee's work position and workplace, while the employee does not agree, the employing entity has the right to unilaterally dissolve the labor contract. In general, it is difficult for the employee to effectively defend against the employing entity's dissolution on this basis. Of course, the employee can claim the economic compensation stipulated in Article 46 of the Labor Contract Law.

(c) Modifications to the labor contract are not in written form, which is not always unprotected by law.

According to Article 43 of the Interpretation (I) of the Supreme People's Court of Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases 【No. 26 [2020] Interpretation of the SPC】, "When the employing entity and the employee agree to modify the labor contract other in writing, and the labor contract as orally modified has been actually performed for over a month and contains nothing in violation of laws, administrative regulations, and public order and good customs, if a party claims invalidity of the modified labor contract on the ground that the contract is not modified in writing, the people's court shall reject such a claim." In other words, if the labor contract is modified by an oral agreement between the parties and the oral agreement to modify the labor contract has been actually performed for more than one month, the employee may not retract the agreement solely on the grounds of not signing a written modification agreement. Therefore, if the employee really does not want to change the workplace or the job position, in order to avoid being recognized as an oral agreement to modify the labor contract and can be supported by the adjudication authority, firstly, he may consider not going to work at the new workplace or job position, and secondly, he may request the unit to issue a written document to prove that the modification of the labor contract is against the employee's will, and the employee reserves the right to defend his rights in the future.

(d) If the employee does not agree to the modification of the labor contract, he may not cease to work at the employing entity and does not fulfill any leave of absence formalities.

As the labor contract between the two parties has not been dissolved and is still binding on both parties, even if the employee does not agree to the modification of the employment contract, he cannot suspend the labor contract on his own by being absent from work, etc. He should continue to provide normal work at the original position or work at the new workplace or job position according to the aforementioned recommendations, otherwise, he will face serious legal risks of absenteeism. If the employee fails to provide normal work at the original workplace or job position for no reason of his own, the employee should form and retain the appropriate evidence for the subsequent defense of his rights. If the employee's absenteeism constitutes a serious breach of the employing entity's rules and regulations, the employing entity may exercise the right of unilateral dissolution in accordance with Article 39(2) of the Labor Contract Law and dissolve the labor contract with the employee without any payment of economic compensation. Reference case：Case｜If An Employee Absenteeism On The Grounds of Petition For Rights Protection , The Unit May Dissolve The Labor Contract According To Law.