A company in China that relocated from a downtown business district to a remote mountainous area allegedly did so knowing employees would have to resign instead of being laid off and paid compensation.
The situation came to light through a former employee, surnamed Chang, who exposed the Xian-based advertising company in central China’s Shaanxi province.
He described the new location in the Qinling Mountains as extremely remote, requiring a two-hour, one-way commute, with limited access to public transport.
“My colleagues without vehicles had to rely on a bus that ran every three hours and then walk another three kilometres through mountainous paths to reach the office,” Chang said.
A taxi from the nearest railway station costs 50 to 60 yuan (US$8) and the company refused to provide commuting subsidies, he added.
Chang also highlighted the poor quality and unsafe working conditions at the site, which lacked proper amenities.
He said female employees had to use public toilets in the nearest village, which was a “long walk” away.
He was also concerned about the safety of employees on the commute back home in the dark, given the number of stray dogs in the area that would follow people.
Faced with these dire conditions, 14 of more than 20 employees signed resignation agreements after unsuccessful protests.
However, just four days after they left, they discovered that the company had moved back to the city centre and was actively hiring new staff.
The employees suspected the company had intentionally created the harsh conditions to force them to resign, but company representative, Zhang, refuted the claims, arguing that the move was a temporary measure to reduce costs.
“The Central Business District rent was high, and the new office was being renovated. We were operating a homestay, so we temporarily moved there for a week,” he said.
He said legal action against the employees was being considered for tarnishing the company’s reputation and causing potential business losses.
Employees refuted Zhang’s claim the move was only intended to be for a week.
“We were told the period of working in the mountains could be very long, possibly until next year. If it was just a week, who could not have endured the working conditions,” one employee said.
The incident has garnered significant online support for the employees, with many criticising the company’s tactics.
“The employer is cunning and manipulative. Bosses being like this is truly dangerous,” commented one.
One online observer put the onus on the employees to deal with the situation, suggesting: “If I were in their place, I’d just rent a house in the mountains. It’s cheap, and I wouldn’t leave without proper compensation.”
While another advised: “A labour contract specifies the work location. Moving from the original office constitutes breach of contract. Employees could opt for forced resignation and seek compensation.’
