未满十八18勿进黄网站_公交车上～嗯啊被高潮视频软件_荡女小姿的YIN乱生活_一卡二卡三乱码免费天美传媒

　　張(zhang)(zhang)某(mou)于2019年12月入職(zhi)甲(jia)公司，擔任店長一(yi)職(zhi)。2020年9月8日，張(zhang)(zhang)某(mou)向重慶市永川區勞(lao)動人事爭議仲裁(cai)委員會(hui)申請仲裁(cai)，要(yao)求(qiu)支付未簽訂(ding)勞(lao)動合同的二倍工(gong)資差額，后該委駁回張(zhang)(zhang)某(mou)的仲裁(cai)請求(qiu)，張(zhang)(zhang)某(mou)不服，起訴至一(yi)審法院。

　　張(zhang)某(mou)向一(yi)審法院起訴請求(qiu)：要求(qiu)甲公司支(zhi)付張(zhang)某(mou)2020年(nian)1月至2020年(nian)8月期間未簽(qian)訂(ding)書面勞(lao)動合同二倍工資差額24038元(yuan)。

　　一(yi)審(shen)庭審(shen)中，甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)舉(ju)示了甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)與其他員工簽訂(ding)(ding)的(de)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合(he)同(tong)(tong)，該合(he)同(tong)(tong)尾(wei)頁甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)的(de)法(fa)定代表人或(huo)者(zhe)委托代理(li)人處簽字為(wei)張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)，證明(ming)張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)的(de)工作職(zhi)責(ze)之一(yi)就是簽訂(ding)(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合(he)同(tong)(tong)，甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)負(fu)責(ze)人也要求(qiu)過(guo)張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)盡快簽訂(ding)(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合(he)同(tong)(tong)，張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)未簽訂(ding)(ding)合(he)同(tong)(tong)的(de)原因(yin)在(zai)張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)自(zi)己。張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)在(zai)仲裁庭審(shen)時陳述甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)曾過(guo)問過(guo)簽訂(ding)(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合(he)同(tong)(tong)的(de)事。

　　一審法院認為

　　用(yong)人(ren)單(dan)位(wei)與(yu)(yu)(yu)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)者建(jian)立(li)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)關(guan)系后(hou)，應(ying)當簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)書面(mian)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同，從用(yong)工(gong)(gong)(gong)之日起滿一個月未(wei)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同應(ying)當從次月起支(zhi)付雙(shuang)(shuang)倍工(gong)(gong)(gong)資(zi)。該雙(shuang)(shuang)倍工(gong)(gong)(gong)資(zi)系一種(zhong)以用(yong)人(ren)單(dan)位(wei)有(you)過錯為(wei)(wei)前提的懲罰性賠(pei)償責(ze)任，目的是為(wei)(wei)了引導存在勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)關(guan)系的雙(shuang)(shuang)方(fang)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)書面(mian)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同，促進用(yong)人(ren)單(dan)位(wei)積極與(yu)(yu)(yu)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)者簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同，規范企業用(yong)工(gong)(gong)(gong)行為(wei)(wei)，構(gou)建(jian)和(he)諧勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)關(guan)系。本案中(zhong)(zhong)，張(zhang)某(mou)在甲(jia)(jia)(jia)公司(si)與(yu)(yu)(yu)其(qi)他員工(gong)(gong)(gong)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)的勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同中(zhong)(zhong)作(zuo)為(wei)(wei)甲(jia)(jia)(jia)公司(si)的委托代理人(ren)進行簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)字，其(qi)工(gong)(gong)(gong)作(zuo)職(zhi)(zhi)責(ze)范圍包括簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同管理等相關(guan)工(gong)(gong)(gong)作(zuo)，其(qi)應(ying)明(ming)確知(zhi)道用(yong)人(ren)單(dan)位(wei)未(wei)與(yu)(yu)(yu)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)者簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同的不利后(hou)果，且事實上，甲(jia)(jia)(jia)公司(si)負(fu)責(ze)人(ren)也(ye)要求(qiu)過張(zhang)某(mou)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)合(he)(he)(he)同，只是最終未(wei)成功(gong)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)。因(yin)此，張(zhang)某(mou)作(zuo)為(wei)(wei)具有(you)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同職(zhi)(zhi)責(ze)的店長(chang)要求(qiu)甲(jia)(jia)(jia)公司(si)支(zhi)付未(wei)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同的二倍工(gong)(gong)(gong)資(zi)，未(wei)舉示相應(ying)證據證明(ming)甲(jia)(jia)(jia)公司(si)不與(yu)(yu)(yu)張(zhang)某(mou)簽(qian)(qian)(qian)(qian)訂(ding)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)合(he)(he)(he)同系甲(jia)(jia)(jia)公司(si)主(zhu)觀故(gu)意，故(gu)一審法(fa)(fa)院對張(zhang)某(mou)的該請(qing)求(qiu)不予(yu)支(zhi)持。依照《中(zhong)(zhong)華人(ren)民(min)共和(he)國勞(lao)(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)(dong)(dong)法(fa)(fa)》第二條之規定，判(pan)決：駁回張(zhang)某(mou)的全部(bu)訴訟請(qing)求(qiu)。一審案件受理費減(jian)半(ban)收取5元，由張(zhang)某(mou)負(fu)擔。

　　二審法院認為

　　本案的爭議焦點為張某主張甲(jia)公司支付未簽訂書面勞動(dong)合同(tong)的雙倍工資差額的請求是否成(cheng)立(li)。就前述爭議焦點，本院評述如下：

　　當事(shi)人對(dui)自(zi)己的(de)(de)主張(zhang)應當舉示(shi)證(zheng)據(ju)予以證(zheng)明，否(fou)則應當承擔舉證(zheng)不能的(de)(de)法律后果。根據(ju)本案查(cha)明的(de)(de)事(shi)實，張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)系甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)的(de)(de)店長，代表甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)與員工(gong)(gong)簽(qian)訂勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)。由此可知，張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)的(de)(de)工(gong)(gong)作(zuo)職(zhi)責范(fan)圍(wei)包括簽(qian)訂勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)管理等相關工(gong)(gong)作(zuo)，其(qi)對(dui)自(zi)身(shen)勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)的(de)(de)簽(qian)訂享有(you)極(ji)大(da)的(de)(de)權利(li)。張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)雖稱曾向(xiang)甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)提出要求簽(qian)訂書(shu)面勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)，甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)拒絕簽(qian)訂，但張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)舉示(shi)的(de)(de)證(zheng)據(ju)無(wu)法達到其(qi)證(zheng)明目的(de)(de)，且甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)對(dui)此不予認(ren)可。而事(shi)實上(shang)，甲(jia)公(gong)司(si)負責人也(ye)過(guo)問過(guo)張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)簽(qian)訂勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)，只是最終(zhong)未(wei)(wei)成功簽(qian)訂。因此，張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)作(zuo)為具有(you)簽(qian)訂勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)職(zhi)責的(de)(de)店長，怠于履行訂立本人書(shu)面勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)的(de)(de)職(zhi)責，之后又以未(wei)(wei)簽(qian)訂書(shu)面勞(lao)(lao)(lao)動(dong)合同(tong)(tong)為由請求用人單位支付二倍(bei)工(gong)(gong)資差額的(de)(de)，不應支持。

　　綜上(shang)，張某的上(shang)訴(su)(su)理由(you)不成(cheng)立，一審(shen)判(pan)決認定(ding)事(shi)實清楚，適用法律正確，應(ying)予維持。依照《中華人(ren)民(min)共和國民(min)事(shi)訴(su)(su)訟法》第一百七十條(tiao)第一款第一項的規定(ding)，判(pan)決如下(xia)：駁(bo)回上(shang)訴(su)(su)，維持原判(pan)。