Employee Penalized Heavily for Taking Leave During Typhoon, with Zero Company Insurance Enrollment: Key Legal Points on Employee Rights Protection and Work Injury Determination

During the latest typhoon, the 10th of the year, an employee of a certain company requested temporary leave due to severe weather, only to be heavily penalized by the company for absenteeism. After the incident came to light, it was further discovered that the company had failed to pay social insurance for its employees for several consecutive years. This quickly sparked widespread discussion, not only over the fairness of this particular case but also bringing to the fore three core issues in labor law: Does requesting leave under extreme weather conditions constitute absenteeism? How much authority does a company have to impose fines? What legal risks lie behind the absence of social insurance? This article breaks down each of these issues one by one from the perspective of legal practice.

Is taking leave during a typhoon considered absenteeism? It depends on the company's policies and reasonableness.

A typhoon constitutes force majeure or an emergency situation? The law does not explicitly enumerate it, but judicial practice typically makes a comprehensive determination based on weather warning levels, commuting risks, and the company's response measures. If the local government issues a red typhoon warning requiring non-essential personnel to stay indoors, an employee's leave request based on personal safety considerations is justified and should not be directly characterized as absenteeism.

However, if the company's rules and regulations clearly stipulate the leave application process, and the employee fails to complete the required procedures (e.g., merely sending a WeChat message without obtaining approval), it may constitute a disciplinary violation. In such cases, the employee should try to apply through traceable means such as email or the OA system, and attach screenshots of weather warnings. If the company refuses without justifiable reason and subsequently imposes penalties for unauthorized absence, the employee may claim that the company has abused its management authority. With reference to Article 39 of the Labor Contract Law, for an employer to terminate a contract on the grounds of unauthorized absence, there must be clear institutional basis and lawful procedures; otherwise, the termination may constitute unlawful termination.

In this case, if the company has not published attendance arrangements for the typhoon period in advance and directly imposes heavy penalties on employees who take emergency leave, the reasonableness is questionable. It is recommended that enterprises formulate emergency response plans for extreme weather in advance, clarify leave approval authority and alternative arrangements, so as to avoid post-hoc disputes.

A company's power to impose fines has limits; arbitrary heavy penalties may constitute illegal conduct.

Many enterprises are accustomed to using fines to manage employees, but according to the Administrative Penalty Law and the former Regulations on Rewards and Penalties for Enterprise Workers (now repealed), employers do not have the authority to impose fines. Under the current legal framework, companies may only issue warnings, demotions, or terminate contracts in accordance with the Labor Contract Law and internal rules and regulations, but may not directly deduct wages as a form of punishment. If losses are caused by an employee's violation of rules, compensation may be deducted from wages pursuant to Article 16 of the Interim Provisions on Wage Payment; however, the monthly deduction shall not exceed 20% of the employee's wage for that month, and the amount after deduction shall not fall below the minimum wage standard.

In this case, if the company imposes "heavy penalties" on employees who take temporary leave by directly deducting a large amount of salary or bonus, it is likely to violate the above provisions. Employees may file a complaint with the labor inspection authorities or apply for labor arbitration to request the return of the deducted amounts. The lawyer reminds that if a fine clause is written into the company's internal rules and regulations, it is invalid due to violation of mandatory legal provisions, and employees are not required to comply with it.

For years with zero employees enrolled in social insurance, the enterprise faces risks of back payments, fines, and workers' compensation claims.

The company involved has been exposed for having zero employees enrolled in social insurance for years, which constitutes a serious illegal act. According to Article 58 of the Social Insurance Law, employers shall register social insurance for employees within 30 days from the date of employment. If contributions are not paid on time, the social insurance collection authority shall order payment within a specified period and impose late fees; if payment is still not made after the deadline, a fine of not less than one time but not more than three times the amount in arrears may be imposed. Employees may also, pursuant to Article 38 of the Labor Contract Law, terminate the labor contract on the grounds of failure to pay social insurance in accordance with the law and claim economic compensation.

More critically, it's the risk of work-related injuries. If an employee has an accident while commuting during a typhoon, according to Item 6 of Article 14 of the Regulations on Work Injury Insurance, injuries sustained while commuting to or from work in a traffic accident, urban rail transit, passenger ferry, or train accident for which the employee is not primarily responsible should be recognized as work-related injuries. However, single-party accidents such as slipping and falling while walking on a typhoon day are generally not recognized as work-related injuries, unless the injury occurs "during the period of business trip" or "within the workplace." If the company has not enrolled employees in social insurance, the employee cannot receive compensation from the Work Injury Insurance Fund, and all medical expenses, disability allowances, etc., must be borne by the company, which is a heavy burden for small and micro enterprises.

In this case, if the employee's leave request was not approved and an accident occurred on the way home, should it be considered a work-related injury? Judicial practice is divided on this issue, but if the company rejected the leave without legitimate reasons and the employee was out due to work-related reasons, it may be recognized as "commuting to and from work." Lawyers advise that employees should keep records of their leave requests, and in the event of an accident, call the police promptly and retain medical documentation for subsequent rights protection.

Employee Rights Protection Paths and Lawyer Recommendations

Facing heavy corporate penalties and lack of social insurance, employees can take the following steps:

1. **Preserve evidence**: Keep pay stubs, attendance records, leave applications, disciplinary notices, etc., and notarize them when necessary.

2. **Administrative Complaint**: Report the fines and social insurance issues to the local labor inspection brigade, and request that corrective action be ordered.

3. **Labor Arbitration**: If you disagree with the penalty or wish to request supplementary social insurance payments, you may apply for arbitration. Note that the statute of limitations is one year.

4. **Contract Termination Claims**: If the company fails to pay social insurance, you may terminate the contract in accordance with Article 38 of the Labor Contract Law and claim economic compensation (one month's wage for each full year of service).

Lawyers remind that workforce management under extreme weather conditions requires a balanced approach. Companies should update their rules and regulations, clearly defining attendance policies for special circumstances such as typhoons, rather than imposing heavy penalties after the fact. Employees should also communicate rationally to avoid making small issues into major losses.

Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm specializes deeply in labor law and has represented multiple labor dispute cases involving extreme weather, providing clients with full-process services from evidence organization to arbitration and litigation. If you encounter similar issues, you are welcome to consult us. We will combine the latest case precedents to formulate the optimal rights protection strategy for you.