CHINA Law and Practice Contributed by: Yang Cheng, Songshan Liu, Yan Yu and Weina Wang, Lantai Law Firm
only in specific statutory scenarios, most notably prior notification before unilateral termination under Article 43 of the Labor Contract Law. There is no automatic right to access full written inves - tigation reports. Such reports often contain third-party personal information or business-sensitive content. What is protected is a narrower right: access to per - sonal information concerning the individual and evi - dence directly relevant to a labour dispute. Employers may not refuse such disclosure solely because the material forms part of an internal document. In labour arbitration or litigation, disclosure is evidence- driven rather than report-driven. Investigation reports may be submitted in whole or in part, with summaries, excerpts or redacted materials commonly used. In short, PRC law recognises a limited right to be informed, not a general right to full disclosure. 6.6 Communications to Authorities Under PRC law, the conclusions of an HR internal investigation do not in themselves create a general obligation to report to government authorities. Internal investigations are treated as tools of corporate self- governance. Reporting duties arise only in specific statutory scenarios and are triggered by the underly - ing incident or risk, not by the investigation process or its conclusion. Mandatory reporting mainly applies to work safety and occupational health. Production safety accidents and suspected occupational diseases must be immedi - ately and truthfully reported under the Work Safety Law and the Law on the Prevention and Control of Occupational Diseases. In these cases, internal inves - tigations may not delay, replace or dilute statutory reporting obligations. Outside these areas, labour and employment laws do not require employers to proactively submit internal investigation findings to labour or social insurance authorities. Employers are required to co-operate with inspections and provide materials upon request, but there is no general duty of voluntary reporting absent an official inquiry.
Voluntary disclosure may be considered in limited circumstances as a compliance or risk-management measure, particularly where timely rectification or miti - gation may affect administrative liability. Such disclo - sure is typically limited to factual summaries and cor - rective actions rather than full investigation reports. In short, HR internal investigation outcomes are report - able only in narrowly defined statutory situations. In most labour-management matters, employers have no proactive reporting obligation but must co-operate fully when authorities lawfully request information. 6.7 Other Communications PRC law does not impose a general obligation on employers to communicate the conclusions of an HR internal investigation to witnesses, team members or other third parties. Any disclosure beyond the inves - tigated employee is discretionary and must comply with labour law, personal information protection and confidentiality principles, in particular necessity and data minimisation. The respondent is the only party with a legally rele - vant right to be informed. Where investigation findings support disciplinary action, job adjustment, remunera - tion consequences or termination, the employer must communicate: • the key conclusions; • applicable internal rules; and • basic factual grounds for the decision. Witnesses, team members and other employees have no right to receive investigation outcomes. At most, they may receive limited, management-level informa - tion where necessary to implement remedial or pre - ventative measures, typically in anonymised or gen - eralised form. Reporters or complainants are usually given only high- level feedback, such as whether the matter was sub - stantiated and whether action was taken. They are not entitled to detailed findings or information relating to other employees. Anonymous reporters generally receive no follow-up.
114 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook