发出聘用函后又以“背调”结果不合标准取消录用 劳动者该怎么办？

Core Viewpoint - A software development company in Shanghai was held liable for breaching the principle of good faith after rescinding a job offer to an applicant due to a background check result, leading to the applicant incurring significant losses [1][3][5]. Group 1: Case Background - The company issued a job offer to Mr. Zhang for a quantitative developer position on April 1, 2024, specifying the intended start date and salary [1]. - Mr. Zhang confirmed his acceptance and began preparations for the new job, including resigning from his previous position and relocating [1][2]. - On April 26, the company informed Mr. Zhang that his background check result was a "yellow light," which did not meet their hiring standards, leading to the cancellation of the job offer [1][2]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings - Mr. Zhang contested the background check result, arguing that the lawsuit record was from a civil rights protection case where he was the plaintiff, and thus should not be a valid reason for employment discrimination [2]. - The background check company later revised its assessment, suggesting that the civil lawsuit was of a lesser degree and recommended changing the result to a "blue light" [2]. - Despite this, the software company maintained its decision to rescind the offer, prompting Mr. Zhang to file a lawsuit for damages [2][3]. Group 3: Court Ruling - The court ruled that the company acted in bad faith by issuing a job offer and then rescinding it without just cause, which caused Mr. Zhang to incur various expenses [3][5]. - The court ordered the company to compensate Mr. Zhang a total of 13,200 yuan for his relocation costs, lost wages, and other related expenses [3][4]. Group 4: Implications for Employment Practices - The case highlights the importance of adhering to the principle of good faith in labor relations, emphasizing that a civil lawsuit record alone is not a legitimate reason to deny employment [5][6]. - Employers are advised to base hiring decisions on relevant job qualifications rather than on an applicant's legal history, as this could lead to legal repercussions [5][6].