Home >

Does Labor Dispute Involve Employees Taking Away Business Secrets?

2009/1/13 14:41:00 41953

With the unremitting efforts of researchers, Ju Cheng has developed a new technology of color preparation, and the efficiency of enterprises has been increasing.

In September 1999, Hao Jun was hired by Ju Cheng company after graduating from technical secondary school, and the two sides signed a 3 year period.

Labor contract

That is, from September 7, 1999 to September 7, 2002.

Labor contract

At the same time, Hao Jun, like other employees of Ju Cheng company, signed a supplemental agreement with chrysanthemum company.

The agreement says: Party A (company) is for protection.

Trade secret

Employees are required to commit themselves to:

1. In the 5 years after the operation of chrysanthemum company and after leaving the chrysanthemum company, the employer will not be employed by similar businesses.

2, without the permission of the company, no company can engage in similar businesses.

3, we must not divulge the company's ceramic manufacturing technology.

If violation of the above agreement, compensation company 40 thousand yuan.

After the contract expired, Hao Jun did not renew the labor contract with the chrysanthemum company, attracted by the high salary of the neighboring county ceramic factory, Hao Jun came to the factory and applied the technology he learned in Ju Cheng company in the process of production.

Chrysanthemum company complained to the court on the grounds of Hao Jun's breach of contract, demanding that it pay 40 thousand yuan for breach of contract.

Because Hao Jun used to be an employee of Ju Cheng company, whether the prosecution of chrysanthemum company should be accepted or not, there is a big difference between the personnel concerned. One opinion is that the case is a labor dispute and should be arbitred by the labor dispute arbitration committee first, and the arbitration award is not accepted.

Another view is that the case should belong to the scope of cases accepted by the people's court.

I agree with the latter view.

The reasons are as follows.

First, the second provision of the regulations on the handling of labor disputes in enterprises of People's Republic of China stipulates: "this regulation applies to the following labor disputes between enterprises and employees in People's Republic of China:

(1) disputes arising from the expulsion, delisting, dismissal of employees and the resignation of employees and automatic turnover.

(two) disputes arising from the implementation of the relevant provisions of the State concerning wages, insurance, welfare, training and labor protection;

(three) disputes arising from the performance of labor contracts;

(four) other labor disputes that shall be dealt with in accordance with these regulations by laws and regulations. "

The labor contract between Hao Jun and chrysanthemum company has been fulfilled. According to the above provisions, the case does not belong to the category of labor disputes.

Second, Hao Jun's behavior is a violation.

Trade secret

Act.

For enterprises, business secrets are economical and practical. They not only affect the economic strength of an enterprise, but also determine the survival and development of enterprises in fierce competition.

Trade secret

It refers to technical information and operational information that is not known to the public, can bring economic benefits to the obligee, and is practical and protected by the obligee.

constitute

Trade secret

The following requirements must be met:

First, it is not known to the public;

Two, it is practical.

Three, it can bring economic benefits to the obligee.

Four, the right holder has taken confidential measures for his technical information and management information.

Combined with this case, the technology of ceramic color preparation of Ju Cheng company conforms to the constituent elements of trade secrets and is therefore a commercial secret.

Violation

Trade secret

It is mainly manifested in the following aspects:

One is to obtain the business secrets of the obligee by theft, inducement, coercion or other improper means.

The two is to disclose, use or allow others to use the previous means to acquire the business secrets of the obligee.

The three is to disclose, use or allow others to use their business secrets in violation of the stipulations or in violation of the requirements of the obligee concerning conservative business secrets.

Four, the employees of the obligee enterprises violate the relevant provisions of the unit or violate the requirements stipulated in the contract for the protection of business secrets, disclose, use or allow others to use the business secrets they have grasped.

Five, it is the third person who knows the above illegal acts and acquirement, use or disclose the business secrets of others.

In this case, Hao Jun used his process technology, which belonged to the chrysanthemum company's commercial secrets, to use it to other enterprises, which conformed to the constitutive characteristics of infringing business secrets and was not responsible for the obligations stipulated in the contract signed by chrysanthemum company. Therefore, he should be liable for breach of contract.

Editor: vivi