this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2026
610 points (94.6% liked)

Technology

84256 readers
3341 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
610
Chinese Courts Rule Companies Cannot Fire Workers Simply to Replace Them With AI (www.caixinglobal.com)
submitted 22 hours ago by stumu415@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world
168 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Firefox -> Reading mode gets past the paywall.

[โ€“] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago

thanks! weird that that does it but not blocking JS

AI generated, for reference only

uhhhh

The reader mode text also doesn't seem to match the article text. I think this is on Caixing's side and not Firefox's side though, since "for reference only" (a literal translation of China-specific legal boilerplate) is a common Chinglishism.

  1. Zhou, in a quality-assurance role verifying AI-generated sentences, faced reassignment and a salary cut from 25,000 yuan ($3,655) to 15,000 yuan due to AI impacts; rejecting it led to dismissal.[para. 4]

that's ironic

  1. The Yuhang court ruled that AI cost savings do not qualify as legal termination grounds like business closure or poor performance, nor as an "objective major change" making contracts impossible, deeming the low-pay offer unreasonable and the firing illegal with compensation ordered.[para. 7][para. 8]

  1. The case turned on whether AI job elimination counts as an "objective major change" under Labor Contract Law.[para. 19]

  2. Beijing guidelines define such changes as uncontrollable, unpredictable events like disasters or policies causing ruin, not business decisions.[para. 20]