photo: Peotra RH/ Shutterstock
The Incident: Employee Suffers Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, Company Refuses to Provide Surveillance Footage to Police
In October of 2022, He Zongying, a female technician employed at a FinDreams Battery factory in Wuhan, a subsidiary of Chinese EV giant BYD, suffered verbal abuse and threats from a male colleague. She immediately reported the issue to the company and also contacted the police. But, to her surprise, the company initially refused to hand over the surveillance footage of the incident to authorities, provided her with no clear path to file a complaint, and then chose to fire her rather than pursue her claim. Meanwhile, the official union tasked with protecting her rights remained silent. Thus, despite the company’s stated commitment to corporate responsibility, its mechanisms for resolving claims of harassment proved not only ineffective but even resulted in the victim being punished by the company for raising the issue in the first place.
Photo: Video Footage shows that He Zongying was harassed in the workshop. In total, the video runs a full 6 minutes. Source: Video Posted Online.
After the incident, He Zongying immediately filed a formal complaint with her supervisor, stating that she had been sexually harassed and, later, also reported the incident to the police. Back at work the next day, she then followed up on the matter with senior staff. But, after a week of waiting, she had not received any response from the company. At first, He’s superiors proposed transferring her to another factory, but she refused. According to He, the man who had harassed her had been hired at the suggestion of the factory director and therefore had connections within the company, leading her to believe that the transfer offer was intended to downplay the situation rather than address it. She also explained that the issue was not just about her:
“I don’t want other women to be harassed in the future.”
The Punishment: Penalised and Fired for Refusing a Settlement
After she refused the transfer, she was called into a meeting with two male colleagues from the factory and a female staff member from Human Resources. But, instead of addressing her complaint, the meeting resulted in He being written up for two violations of company policy. To add insult to injury, one of these violations even stated that she had humiliated and verbally abused the man who had harassed her. She expressed her confusion, pointing out that the incident was on tape and asking why her attempt to stop his harassment was now being characterised as “humiliation and abuse.” In response, her supervisor merely stated that she could have handled the situation differently.
photo: video footage from the disciplinary meeting. BYD Managers called a meeting with He Zongying to inform her that she is being penalised. Source: Video posted online.
The second penalty He Zongying received was for exhibiting “improper conduct” and engaging in “repeated misbehaviour within a three-month period.” In addition to the initial altercation, this penalty also involved He allegedly leaving her workstation without authorisation on other occasions. During the meeting, her supervisor mentioned that there was video evidence of her actions. However, she explained that her job required her to move between different workstations. She believed that the company was simply trying to find any reason to justify firing her unlawfully.
Over the following week or so, she was instructed to await further notice and was told that she needed not come into work. When she was finally instructed to return, however, she found that she had been removed from all technical tasks and instead given janitorial duties. Meanwhile, all the days she had been forced to take off by the company had been deducted from her salary. She believed that factory management meant to humiliate her. After multiple unsuccessful meetings about the issue, on 22 December 2022, she finally pursued labour arbitration against the company in the Labour Dispute Arbitration Commission. Roughly a week later, the company formally fired her before a formal decision had even been made in the case.
Photos: two photos of disciplinary notices received by He Zongying for “improper conduct” and “repeated misbehaviour within a 3-month period”; & a screenshot of BYD’s Corporate Social Responsibility Policy stating that it is committed to preventing harassment. Source: Workers' Douyin account and BYD website
The Aftermath: Following an Appeal in Her Favour, BYD Applies Pressure
Though her initial claim of illegal dismissal was initially lost in the local court system, He Zongying filed an appeal to be heard in a higher court. In December 2023, a year after her termination, she finally achieved a ruling in her favour. FinDreams Battery then applied for a retrial of this second case but after a hearing in the Hubei Provincial Higher People’s Court, the decision was upheld, and the company’s application for a retrial was rejected. It was determined that FinDreams Battery had illegally terminated her employment and the company was ordered to pay her 6,000 yuan in compensation.
He Zongying attempted to file a criminal private prosecution against her colleague for harassment, but the court refused to accept it, resulting in two separate cases. Since the judicial process had failed in the harassment case, her only hope now was that a fair solution could be achieved via internal company procedures. With this in mind, she continued filing complaints with the relevant departments at FinDreams Battery. She even had her lawyer send a notice directly to BYD’s Shenzhen headquarters. Throughout, she also documented the case on social media, asking for assistance.
BYD finally contacted her by phone after receiving her notice, but rather than addressing her complaint, they requested that she delete her online posts and refrain from harming the company’s reputation. When she pressed further, asking if they would address her complaint, she was told that the complaint would continue to be overseen by BYD’s Wuhan offices and that the Shenzhen headquarters would not be involved.
On 4 December 2023, a Ms. Zhang from BYD Wuhan’s Audi and Inspection Office finally sent an email to He informing her that her termination was unrelated to the harassment incident and that the company would be formally closing the case on her harassment complaint. Zhang had also stated in a previous email that the man who had harassed He had left the company in January of 2023 and that the company would therefore conduct no further investigation.
Photo: An e-mail He Zongying received from BYD headquarters notifying her that her complaint case was being closed. Source: Photos posted online.
In Word Only: BYD Contradicts its own Corporate Responsibility Policies, Union Offers No Support
In its labour rights protection policy, FinDreams Battery states that employees are valuable assets and offers various channels through which employees can provide feedback. The company’s 2023 “Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Report” even outlines specific complaint mechanisms and mental health support services offered to workers. The parent firm BYD has also stated in its own corporate responsibility statements that it “firmly opposes workplace violence and harassment.”
However, these commitments appear to exist only in word. According to He Zongying, throughout the entire process, no one told her what procedures the company would follow to address this sort of harassment. As the complainant, the company should have informed her of whether it was safe to return to work and, ideally, discussions with senior management should have been led by female staff. Even worse, she was then pressured by individuals at various levels of the company to delete statements she had made online for the sake of not “damaging the company’s reputation.”
The ordeal has also left a blemish on her resume and negatively impacted her life in the years since. When she subsequently applied for jobs at other factories, potential employers often tactfully rejected her applications after the background check was performed. Two years later, she is unable to continue working as a skilled technician and must now make a living by selling snacks at a streetside stand in her hometown.
She had not asked for help from the official union at any point and also notes that the union had not done anything to get involved in the incident. According to He, these company unions rarely serve any real function and mostly just provide employees with certain minor benefits, such as summertime cooling products:
“When it actually comes down to an issue concerning the interests of the employees and the company, it [the union] will basically remain silent.”
The incident therefore, revealed failures at multiple levels. First and foremost, the company failed to prevent and address sexual harassment, violating the 2012 “Special Provisions on Labour Protection for Female Employees” and the 2023 “Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Rights and Interests of Women.” The company’s actions also demonstrate a clear failure to implement the requirements laid out in the 2020 Civil Code, which states that enterprises “shall take reasonable precautions, accept and hear complaints, investigate and handle cases, and take other similar measures to prevent and stop sexual harassment” and notes that individuals who have suffered sexual harassment “have the right to request the actor to bear civil liability in accordance with the law.”
The official union should have also played its mandated role. The Trade Union Law of the People’s Republic of China clearly states that unions are tasked with protecting workers’ rights as well as their health and safety. Article 23 of the law mandates that trade unions “shall represent workers in negotiations” when these rights are infringed upon and Article 26 states that “trade unions have the right to investigate violations of workers’ legal rights.” In listing possible legal violations, Article 23 also specifically notes “infringements of the special rights and interests of female employees and minors.”
Photo: FinDreams Battery’s Corporate Responsibility Policy states that “employees are the company’s most valuable asset.” Source: FinDreams Battery Website.
No Conclusion:
If BYD’s union had been proactive in He’s case, stepping in to represent her in the complaint process, the company would have been able to open a direct line of communication about any of its initial concerns, rather than hesitating when it came time to provide the footage of the incident. Similarly, if the union had fulfilled its responsibilities in the first place and negotiated with senior management before the decision was made to punish and ultimately fire He, perhaps the entire arbitration process and the subsequent ruling against the company could have been avoided.
Nor is this an isolated case. In the factory, women’s rights are a collective issue. He’s case represents a more general lack of adequate mechanisms for protecting workers across the entire industry. Only through strengthening the involvement of unions, improving the channels for internal complaints, and increasing oversight on issues of corporate responsibility can we truly provide workers with a safe and fair working environment in the future. For every worker suffering injustice, the struggle for adequate protection should not be a solitary battle but instead a collective demand.
photo: Pravinrus/ Shutter Stock
CLB reached out to both BYD and Findreams Battery for comments but had not received a response from either by the time of publication.
This story was originally published in Chinese: 比亚迪女工遇职场性骚扰反被非法解雇 工会不应缺位职工维权