Plant Relocation, Collective Consultation, and 200 Refusals
A Ningbo garment manufacturer with 620 employees is moving its plant 40 km to a new industrial park in six weeks. Of 430 production workers, 55% say they will move; the rest face a commute of over 1.5 hours each way. The company offers a shuttle and a ¥300 monthly transport allowance. The union has requested collective consultation. Eighty-five employees have 10 or more years' service; 60 are within three years of statutory retirement; 120 are migrant workers on fixed-term contracts. The local labor bureau is monitoring the case and wants no disruption. Management wants to know whether it can require relocation, and if 200 employees refuse, whether it can terminate them and at what cost. Monthly payroll is ¥5.2 million; average monthly wage is ¥6,800; the company has no experience with mass layoffs.
1. Can the company unilaterally require employees to relocate? Analyze the legal routes if 200 employees refuse, including mass-layoff procedure and cost ranges.
Read the worked answer
General rule. A change of work location is a change to the labor contract and normally requires agreement under Article 35. The company cannot simply order employees to report to the new park. A 40 km move with a commute exceeding 1.5 hours is likely to be a material change, even with a shuttle and ¥300 allowance. Some tribunals may accept the move as reasonable if the employer provides transport and the change is within the same city, but that is fact-specific and not a safe basis for unilateral action. Route 1 – individual agreement. Negotiate written contract amendments with employees who accept. Offer transition support, a retention bonus, or flexible hours. Route 2 – Article 40(3). If the contract cannot be performed and no agreement is reached after consultation, the employer may terminate with 30 days' notice or one month's pay in lieu, plus severance N. This is an individual route, but using it for 200 people at once invites scrutiny. Route 3 – Article 41 economic layoff. If 20 or more employees are terminated in one period, the company should follow mass-layoff procedure: 30 days' notice to the union or all employees, explanation, and report to the labor administration. Retain long-service employees, near-retirement employees, and sole breadwinners as required. Cost. At an assumed average of 8 years' service, N for 200 employees = 200 × 8 × ¥6,800 = ¥10.88 million. Adding one month's pay in lieu = ¥1.36 million, total about ¥12.24 million. If terminations are found illegal, 2N = ¥21.76 million. At 10 years' average service, N alone is ¥13.6 million. Conclusion. Do not plan for unilateral relocation. Plan for negotiation, consultation, and a funded separation reserve.
2. Design a segmented employee-relations and retention plan for the six-week transition. Address the long-service, near-retirement, migrant, and willing-to-move groups.
Read the worked answer
Segment the workforce. Build a confidential roster with service years, contract type, retirement date, commute distance, skill criticality, and stated intention. Do not rely only on the 55% survey; verify with individual conversations. Willing movers. Offer a written relocation agreement, shuttle routes, the ¥300 allowance, and a one-time transition payment. Confirm start dates and avoid last-minute changes. Long-service employees (85 with 10+ years). These employees have high severance cost and institutional knowledge. Offer retention bonuses, seniority recognition, preferred shifts, and a choice between relocation and a negotiated separation. For those who cannot move, calculate N precisely and consider a phased exit. Near-retirement employees (60 within three years). Explore early-retirement or internal transfer options where lawful; do not force retirement. If separation is unavoidable, explain pension and social insurance continuity. Migrant fixed-term workers (120). Check contract end dates and dormitory or housing support. Offer a housing subsidy or new dormitory arrangement; clarify return-home options and final pay. Union and government. Meet the union weekly, share the plan, and document consultation. Brief the labor bureau early. Set up a joint transition committee with employee representatives. Communication. Hold town halls, small-group meetings, and individual consultations. Publish a timetable and a named contact. Avoid security-heavy messaging that escalates tension. Contingency. Prepare for a work stoppage or sit-in; train managers to listen and refer issues, not to threaten. Keep a daily risk log.
3. What six-week timeline and decision gates would you recommend to avoid unlawful unilateral action and disruption?
Read the worked answer
Week 1 – legal and data baseline. Confirm the move date, contract terms, and commute impact. Prepare an employee-level cost model. Notify the union formally and schedule the first consultation. Brief the labor bureau. Week 2 – consultation and segmentation. Present the business rationale and support package to the union and employee representatives. Start individual conversations. Identify employees who will move, need support, or intend to refuse. Week 3 – offers and agreements. Issue written relocation agreements to willing employees. For refusers, explore alternatives: later start date, different shift, transport hub, or negotiated separation. Do not issue termination notices yet. Week 4 – decision gate. If fewer than 70% of critical production workers have signed, delay the start or run a dual-site transition. If 200 or more separations are likely, trigger Article 41 preparation: 30-day notice, union consultation, and labor bureau report. Week 5 – finalize. Complete individual consultations. Make severance calculations and obtain approvals. Train managers on the communication script and legal boundaries. Week 6 – execute carefully. Move only employees who have signed. For separations, issue lawful written notices with correct notice or pay in lieu, severance, and social insurance handling. Keep a grievance desk on site. Post-move. Monitor attendance, turnover, and union temperature weekly for 90 days. Red line. Do not treat refusal to relocate as absenteeism or misconduct unless the contract clearly permits the move and the employee has been given a lawful instruction. That would create a high risk of wrongful termination and collective dispute.