In general, Generation Z abhors the so-called 996 work rhythm – shifts that last from 9am to 9pm, six days a week – widely expected of employees by Chinese tech giants.
Sounds like a great system. wtf
Regarding the response from bosses, the blogger Massage Bear wrote: “Even if my boss scolds me [for ‘touching fish’], calls me rubbish or blames me for being not responsible, I will just smile and will never get angry. I will never take the initiative to resign. If he fires me, I will receive compensation of ‘N+1’.”
China’s Labour Law stipulates that if a company fires an employee without substantive reasons, it should pay them compensation, which is usually the employee’s monthly salary times the number (N) of years they have worked for the company plus one.
So, how substantive of a reason do they need?
China’s Labour Law stipulates that if a company fires an employee without substantive reasons, it should pay them compensation, which is usually the employee’s monthly salary times the number (N) of years they have worked for the company plus one.
Holy shit this is literally better than some of the best unemployment/pension systems in the US.
Which is why I asked the question of what constitutes a substantive reason, because at least in the west it seems corporations aren’t having issues coming up with stuff to get someone canned.
Like for example the often used tool of restructuring that just most unfortunately eliminated a few jobs.
Obviously I couldn’t say if this translates to China, but I can’t imagine their corporations being much different in that respect.
If their confidence is anything to go by, that blogger at least seemed to believe they’d receive it even if they were fired for slacking off.
