OCT(SZ:000069) Sou Hu Cai Jing·2025-08-01 07:13Core Viewpoint - The forced co-investment system at China Overseas Land and Investment Limited (华侨城) has raised significant concerns regarding employee rights, governance compliance, and decision-making transparency, particularly in light of recent employee complaints about the inability to recover invested funds due to project delays and financial losses [2][5][8] Group 1: Co-Investment System - The co-investment system was initiated in November 2019, with employees facing pressure to participate, as non-participation could lead to marginalization within the company [4] - Employees are reportedly subjected to a "persuasion loop" involving direct leadership discussions and human resources intervention, creating an environment where opting out is not a viable choice [4][7] - The management guidelines stipulate that employees can only recover up to 80% of their investment after the project's cash flow turns positive, with full recovery contingent on project completion, which has not been met in many cases [4][6] Group 2: Employee Rights and Governance Issues - The recent co-investment incident has sparked public scrutiny over the company's commitment to employee rights, governance compliance, and transparency in decision-making processes [5][8] - The company's 2024 ESG report claims to uphold equal rights for employees in recruitment, promotion, and compensation, yet the co-investment system contradicts these claims by imposing financial risks on employees [5][6] - The co-investment system's linkage to performance evaluations creates a conflict where employees feel compelled to invest to avoid negative impacts on their career progression, undermining the principle of voluntary participation [7][8] Group 3: Risk Management and Transparency - The co-investment system may violate labor laws that prohibit coercing employees into unrelated economic activities, raising legal compliance concerns for the company [8] - Reports indicate a lack of transparency regarding the financial status of co-investment projects, with employees unable to access crucial information about their investments [9] - The risk-sharing model presented by the company appears to disproportionately burden employees with financial losses while limiting their potential gains, particularly in a declining real estate market [9]