The following new provisions in No. 27 deserve the attention of relevant enterprises:

1. Further clarify the scope of industries and fields that should purchase such insurance

Specifically, the scope of industries and fields includes units in high-risk industries and fields such as mines, hazardous chemicals, fireworks and firecrackers, transportation, construction, civil explosive materials, metal smelting, fishery production and etc..

In addition, No. 27 clearly states the following requirements: (1) enterprises shall pay the premiums for such insurance timely and in full amount, they shall not apportion such insurance to individual employees in any way; and (2) The premiums can be truthfully included in the work safety expenses of the enterprise.

2. Clarify the coverage of such insurance

It is required that the insurance coverage cover all employees of the enterprise, that is, temporary employees, dispatched workers, etc. are all included in the insured objects. The insurance amount shall implement the same standard, and there shall be no differential treatment due to employment methods, job positions, etc.

3. Further clarify the scope of compensation for such insurance

No. 27 still divides the scope of compensation for such insurance into three parts: (1) Personal injuries and deaths of employees; (2) Personal injuries, deaths, and property losses of third parties; and (3) Expenses for accident rescue and relief, medical treatment, accident identification, legal litigation, etc. However, regarding the part of personal injuries and deaths of employees, No. 27 clearly defines it as “the injuries and deaths of employees for which the insured is legally liable due to work safety accidents”, rather than the personal injuries and deaths in a broad sense that occur in production enterprises.

4. Clearly stipulate the upper limit of the commission ratio for such insurance

No. 27 stipulates that the commission ratio for such insurance shall not be higher than 5%, which will help guide insurance institutions to use the premiums for accident prevention and loss compensation.

5. Provide the limit of liability for death and disability

No. 27 has increased the limit of liability for death and disability per person from CNY300,000 to CNY400,000, and local authorities can, on the basis of this minimum guarantee limit, determine the local minimum guarantee limit in consideration of the actual situation.

In addition, No.27 has also optimized the claim settlement service, established a rapid claim settlement mechanism and an advance payment mechanism for major or typical accidents, so as to quickly pay or make an advance payment of the determined insurance compensation in accordance with laws and agreements after an accident occurs.

The quality standard is a common clause in sales contracts. Usually, the parties would choose the national standard, industry standard, local standard, and enterprise standard, or choose more than one of the aforementioned standards. Among them, the enterprise standard is independently formulated by each enterprise (commonly known as the “ex-factory standard”). The prerequisite for the enterprise standard to be used as a quality evaluation standard is that the seller must prove that the buyer is aware of the content of the enterprise standard. How can the seller prove that the buyer is aware of it? Whether the seller could directly disclose its standard to the buyer, or the seller should file its standard?

For special industries such as food and medicine, due to the implementation of mandatory supervision, the enterprise standard is included in the scope of mandatory supervision. For other industries, it is necessary to investigate whether there is any mandatory requirement regarding the enterprise standards, and what are the requirements, if any.

The enterprise standard filing system originated from the “Measures for the Administration of Enterprise Standardization” in 1990. However, the vast majority of enterprises have not gone through the filing procedures. There are roughly two reasons. Firstly, the filing procedures are cumbersome. Secondly, filing means that the technical parameters, indicators, raw materials, etc. in the enterprise standard will be made public, which may disclose trade secrets. In addition, in line with the transformation of market supervision from ex-ante to ex-post, in 2015, the State Council proposed a reform plan to gradually cancel the enterprise standard filing system. In 2019, the “Standardization Law” abolished the filing system and replaced it with the “Self-declaration Publicity and Supervision System”.

Then, how should enterprises implement the “Self-declaration Publicity and Supervision System”?

Article 14 of the “Measures for the Promotion of Enterprise Standardization” stipulates that “The State shall implement a system of self-declaration, publicity and supervision of enterprise standards. Enterprises shall make public the serial numbers and names of the mandatory standards, recommended standards, group standards or enterprise standards they implement in connection with the provision of products or services. Where enterprises formulate standards by themselves or jointly formulate standards, they shall disclose to the public functional indexes of products and services, performance indexes of products and corresponding experiment methods, inspection methods or evaluation methods. …… Where the functional indexes and performance indexes disclosed by enterprises are lower or lower than recommended standards, enterprises shall explicitly indicate so in the disclosure of self-declaration…….” Article 16 stipulates that, enterprises are encouraged to make self-declaration public through the national unified public service platform for enterprise standards information, enterprises making self-declaration public through other channels shall explicitly indicate such channels on the national unified public service platform for enterprise standards information.

In addition, Article 30 stipulates that if an enterprise fails to publicize its enterprise standard, the standardization administrative department of the people’s government at or above the county level shall order it to make corrections within a time limit; if it fails to make corrections within the time limit, it shall be publicly announced on the enterprise standard information public service platform.

In conclusion:

The self-declaration publicity is a mandatory obligation, and those who violate it are at risk of being ordered to make corrections within a time limit.

The current regulations on the self-declaration publicity requirements for enterprise standards define the scope of publicity and do not limit the means of publicizing, taking into account the need for the protection of trade secrets.

Therefore, enterprises can choose to publicize their enterprise standards through the public service platform or through other means. In other words, both from the perspective of fulfilling mandatory obligations and from the perspective of avoiding the inability to provide evidence in case of quality disputes, the seller should provide its enterprise standard to the buyer.

A factory owner in Dongguan refused to hire a person with a tattoo, because she believed that a person with a tattoo might affect the overall atmosphere of the factory, as having a tattoo gives people the first impression that such person is either involved in underworld activities or disobedient. The factory owner’s words sparked a heated debate. Some people believe that the company has the right to decide its hiring standards based on its own judgment criteria, while others believe that tattoos, hairstyles, clothing, etc. fall within the scope of personal image management, and the company has no right to interfere. The dispute lies in the appropriate extent of the company’s management over its employees.

Tattoos originated from ancient religious ceremonies. In ancient China, tattoos were commonly seen in the totem beliefs of ethnic minorities. Among the Han people, tattoos were widely used as a symbol of punishment. Although Yue Fei’s tattoo represented his ambitions, such usage is rare. After China’s reform and opening up, tattoos is widely used as a symbol of personal characteristic.

In summary, Chinese has a negative perception of tattoos. However, currently, the explicit prohibition regulations regarding tattoos mainly target specific groups of people or specific industries. For example, the “Measures for the Governance of Minors’ Tattoos” stipulates that no enterprise, organization, or individual shall provide tattoo services to minors, nor shall they coerce, entice, or instigate minors to get tattoos. Another example is that the “Special Standards for Physical Examinations in Civil Servant Recruitment” stipulates that there shall be no tattoos on the whole body for positions in public security organs, prisons, etc.; for other positions, if the tattoo cannot be covered by clothing, it is also considered unqualified. Additionally, the “Quality Specifications for Railway Transport Services” stipulates that “there shall be no tattoos on the exposed parts of the bodies of train staffs.” Moreover, service industries such as airlines, banks, and hotels often have similar requirements. In consideration of safety or hygiene, industries such as hospitals and food factories impose restrictions or bans on tattoos. This is also the fundamental reason that the employers could be supported by the judicial authorities in the very few cases of dismissal due to tattoos (such as the case No. 1069 in the initial civil judgment of Kunming in 2013).

For enterprises other than those mentioned above, if they regard having a tattoo as a reason for serious violation of internal rules and regulations that can lead to dismissal, they may be suspected of employment discrimination and have high risks. If an enterprise has a low tolerance for tattoos and hopes to impose restrictions, the following measures can be taken into consideration.

(1) In the labor discipline regulations, enterprises could advocate civilized business etiquette, require appropriate dressing and grooming, and list tattoos, exaggerated hair coloring, and exaggerated hairstyles in the prohibited categories.

(2) For enterprises with a lot of external communication, such as trading enterprises, in order to deter employees from getting tattoos, it is recommended to list behaviors such as exposed tattoos as objects of punishment (such as a warning) in the penalty provisions of the rules and regulations.

(3) When an individual case occurs, it is necessary to comprehensively consider whether to impose a penalty and what kind of penalty to impose based on its internal rules and regulations, combined with the characteristics of the employee’s position, the degree of tattoo exposure, the existence of complaints, and other circumstances. If necessary, the enterprise can also consider to adjust the employee’s position.