Lawyers' Group Releases Report on Women's Employment Discrimination
Fertility Discrimination Persists; Progress Made in Combating Sexual Harassment
后附中文版
On May 1, 2025, International Labor Day, the Volunteer Lawyers' Network Against Employment Discrimination published the Report on the Implementation of Anti-Discrimination Employment Laws (Women's Section). The report finds that recruitment and workplace discrimination against women remain widespread in China. Women continue to face significant challenges in job applications, workplace protections during pregnancy and childbirth, equal pay for equal work, and access to anti-discrimination remedies.
The report highlights that China's decades-long "one-child policy" ended, and the "three-child policy" was implemented in 2021, granting women of childbearing age the right to have three children. However, many employers, concerned that female employees may take three maternity leaves, are increasingly reluctant to hire women of childbearing age.
Lu Miaoqing, a female lawyer from Guangdong who represented the high-profile "Female Chef Employment Discrimination Case," stated: "In recent years, the government has begun implementing supportive measures to foster a 'fertility-friendly' work environment. This necessarily requires protecting women’s workplace rights, particularly regarding pregnancy and maternity leave. However, most gender-related legislation remains at the advisory level, making it difficult to enforce effectively."
Regarding the prevention of workplace sexual harassment, the report finds that in recently collected cases, most employers proactively dismissed perpetrators of sexual harassment, indicating progress in addressing workplace harassment.
Liu Wei, a female lawyer who previously practiced in Beijing and now resides in New York, stated: "Since January 2018, the Me Too anti-sexual harassment movement has gained significant momentum in China. Sexual harassment allegations raised by women across various sectors have reverberated through education, media, philanthropy, academia, politics, and religious communities. High-profile cases, such as Xianzi’s lawsuit against CCTV host Zhu Jun, have greatly advanced efforts to combat sexual harassment in China."
The Volunteer Lawyers' Network Against Employment Discrimination, established on April 29, 2016, by 32 lawyers from 14 provinces, has provided legal assistance for multiple cases involving health-related discrimination and gender discrimination over the past nine years. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the group publicly addressed a letter to National People’s Congress representatives, advocating for the equal employment rights of COVID-19 survivors. The recently released Report on the Implementation of Anti-Discrimination Employment Laws (Women's Section) focuses on women's equal employment rights. Subsequent reports in this series will cover topics such as "Health Conditions" and "Disabilities."
Anti-Discrimination Litigation: Heavy Burden of Proof on Workers
The Report on the Implementation of Anti-Discrimination Employment Laws (Women's Section) finds that the court’s case classification system has increased the burden of proof on workers, including both employees and job seekers, a situation that urgently needs reform. In December 2018, the Supreme People’s Court issued the Notice on Adding Civil Case Classifications, introducing the case category of “Equal Employment Rights Disputes.” The report analyzes two Beijing-based court rulings involving female workers who were allegedly reassigned or received salary reductions due to pregnancy or childbirth. After filing lawsuits under “Equal Employment Rights Disputes,” the courts required the plaintiffs to prove that their employers’ actions were discriminatory based on their pregnancy or childbirth status. Both plaintiffs lost their cases due to their inability to meet the burden of proof.
While China’s judicial system established a specific case category for employment discrimination, reflecting an emphasis on protecting workers’ equal employment rights, in practice, this has shifted the burden of proof onto workers. As early as 20 years ago, the Supreme People’s Court recognized the difficulty workers face in proving the reasons behind employer actions such as dismissal or salary reduction. Consequently, it stipulated that “in labor dispute cases, where disputes arise from employer decisions such as expulsion, termination, dismissal, contract termination, salary reduction, or calculation of a worker’s years of service, the employer bears the burden of proof.” However, the newly introduced “Equal Employment Rights Disputes” category is not classified as a “labor dispute” but as a subcategory of “General Personality Rights Disputes” under personality rights disputes. The allocation of the burden of proof follows rules analogous to general tort disputes, requiring the plaintiff to provide preliminary evidence for their claims and refute any counterevidence presented by the defendant. As a result, the burden of proof on workers in these cases is significantly heavier than in labor dispute cases.
Workplace Sexual Harassment: Employers Proactively Dismiss Perpetrators
The report examines judgments and rulings from 33 cases related to workplace sexual harassment. It finds that 29 cases involved verbal or behavioral harassment between colleagues within the same workplace, one case occurred between workers in external business interactions, and three cases involved livestreamer-agency or partnership contexts. In 20 cases, employers proactively dismissed employees accused of sexual harassment. Of these, 13 dismissals were deemed lawful by courts, requiring no economic compensation for contract termination. Seven dismissals were ruled unlawful, either because the behavior was not deemed sexual harassment or because the burden of proof was not met, requiring employers to pay compensation for unlawful contract termination. In seven cases, employers who dismissed accused employees also failed to pay owed wages, work-related injury compensation, performance-based pay, or year-end bonuses. Three accusers of sexual harassment sought compensation for emotional distress caused by the harassment; two cases were upheld by courts, with awards of 5,000 CNY and 2,000 CNY, respectively, for emotional distress.
Previous studies on workplace sexual harassment have noted that Article 90, Paragraph 3 of the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings (revised in 2019) stipulates that “testimony from a witness with a conflict of interest with one party or its agent” cannot solely serve as the basis for determining case facts. However, the report finds that the Guangzhou Intermediate Court exercised discretionary judgment, affirming sexual harassment based on the testimony of two female workers who were victims.
The report suggests that the proactive dismissal of employees accused of sexual harassment by most employers may be attributed to the Supreme People’s Court’s Guiding Case No. 181, issued in 2022. This case clarified that employers’ managerial staff must take reasonable measures to address complaints of sexual harassment from employees. Failure to do so may justify the employer’s right to terminate the labor contract with the managerial staff.
Civil Society’s Advocacy Efforts: Ongoing Suppression
Since 2014, the government has been escalating its crackdown on rights advocacy organizations, the legal community, and academia, leading to a sustained decline in actions advocating for gender equality. The government currently exhibits extremely low tolerance for advocacy efforts by civil society organizations, refusing to recognize reports or legal aid initiatives addressing workplace gender discrimination.
In February 2023, the feminist organization “Employment Gender Discrimination Monitoring Team” released the 2023 National Civil Service Examination Gender Discrimination Research Report. The report found that the 2023 national civil service examination offered 17,655 positions, of which 10,993 positions (62.72%) had no gender preference, while 6,662 positions (37.73%) exhibited gender preferences. Among the positions with gender preferences, 3,787 (21.45%) favored male candidates, and 2,875 (16.28%) favored female candidates. Positions favoring males outnumbered those favoring females by 912, with a 5.17% higher proportion. The data in the report reveals that, despite the Chinese government’s written commitments and legal support for workplace gender equality, persistent gender bias remains in government civil service recruitment practices.
Upon its release on a WeChat public account, the report was promptly removed. On January 20, 2025, the WeChat public account of the Employment Gender Discrimination Monitoring Team, “Jiancha Group” (煎茶小组), was deleted and can no longer be updated. The government’s tight control over official data, academia, and media has suppressed public access to information about the extent of gender bias in government and broader societal contexts.
Media and Commercial Recruitment Platforms: Supporting Equal Employment Rights
The report highlights coverage by the influential mainland Chinese media outlet China Youth Daily in an article titled “How to Break Invisible Workplace Discrimination.” The article featured the real-life stories of four women facing employment discrimination, including: a young female job seeker asked about her marriage and childbirth plans during an interview; an intern exposing a major company’s HR department for prioritizing male candidates while scrutinizing female candidates’ marriage and childbirth plans during interviews; a magazine editorial director reassigned from core business operations to an administrative office role with a reduced salary after giving birth to her second child; and a female director with superior academic credentials and alma mater compared to her male counterpart, yet earning less than male colleagues in equivalent roles.
Additionally, the 2024 Women’s Workplace Status Survey Report published by Zhaopin (a leading Chinese online recruitment platform) revealed that 54% of female respondents had experienced gender-based employment discrimination, compared to only 6.6% of male respondents. Furthermore, 48.8% of female respondents reported being directly asked gender-related personal questions (such as marital status or childbirth plans) during interviews. Women’s salaries were, on average, 10% lower than men’s for equivalent roles, with the gap being even more pronounced in mid- and senior-level management positions. Additionally, 33.1% of female respondents faced barriers to promotions or salary increases due to gender, compared to 9.2% of male respondents who experienced gender-based obstacles to advancement. Moreover, 47.6% of female respondents reported being harassed by male colleagues or clients during work-related social gatherings, such as drinking events. These practices undoubtedly restrict women’s career choices and opportunities for professional growth.
Recommendations: Promote Equal Pay for Equal Work and Initiate Public Interest Litigation
The report argues that salary confidentiality agreements enable companies to obscure “unequal pay for equal work” practices, allowing them to avoid justifying salary disparities among employees in the same role. This disproportionately disadvantages female workers, fostering isolated and guarded relationships among employees rather than transparent, competitive, and healthy workplace dynamics. Given that individual female workers often have little room to refuse signing salary confidentiality agreements when demanded by employers, labor unions, as collective organizations formed through workers’ freedom of association, should take on this responsibility. The report recommends that civil society organizations actively advocate for and persuade local unions to include the statement “workers have the right to refuse to sign salary confidentiality agreements” in workers’ rights information booklets. Furthermore, companies should be required to distribute these booklets to new hires.
Currently, public interest litigation cases addressing employment discrimination, initiated through clues reported on the “Yixin Weigong” (益心为公) prosecutorial cloud platform, almost only focus on gender discrimination in recruitment advertisements. The report suggests that female workers and public interest organizations report instances of unequal pay for equal work, as well as gender-based discrimination—such as salary reductions, reassignments, or isolation forcing resignation—experienced by female employees during pregnancy or childbirth, whether ongoing or past, to the “Yixin Weigong” platform. Female workers are encouraged to record their entire process of using the platform as evidence. If prosecutors fail to take action after a prolonged period, this evidence can be used to seek assistance from the All-China Women’s Federation or to file lawsuits in court.
Full Chinese report: 就业反歧视法律实施报告（妇女篇）
AI-translated English report, provided as a courtesy for easier access: Report on the Implementation of Anti-Discrimination Employment Laws (Women's Section)
律师团发布妇女就业歧视报告
生育歧视仍然普遍，防治性骚扰有进步
2025年5月1日“五一”国际劳动节当天，反就业歧视志愿律师团发布了《就业反歧视法律实施报告（妇女篇）》。报告发现，针对妇女的招聘歧视和职场歧视在中国仍然普遍存在。妇女在求职、孕产期的工作保障、同工同酬以及反歧视维权等方面，仍面临显著的困难。
报告指出，中国政府推行了数十年的“一胎化”政策告终，2021年“三孩”政策落地，育龄妇女有了生育三个孩子的权利，但许多雇主顾虑到女员工可能会休三次产假，从而更不愿意聘用育龄妇女。
来自广东的女律师陆妙卿，曾经代理过颇具影响的“女厨师就业歧视案”，陆妙卿表示：“近年来政府开始着手推行支持措施，以营造‘生育友好型’工作环境。这必然要求保障妇女的职场权利，特别是在怀孕和产假方面。然而，大多数性别立法仅停留在指导性层面，难以落地执行。”
在防治职场性骚扰方面，报告发现，近期所收集到的案例中，大部分用人单位能主动解雇性骚扰的实施者，显示职场性骚扰的防治有所进步。
曾在北京执业、现居纽约的女律师刘巍表示：“自2018年1月开始， Me Too反性骚扰运动在中国不断掀起波澜，各界妇女发起的性骚扰指控，震动了教育界、媒体界、公益圈、学术界、政治界、宗教界，例如弦子起诉中央电视台主持人朱军等，这些行动极大促进了中国的性骚扰防治。”
反就业歧视志愿律师团，由来自14个省的32位律师于2016年4月29日成立，九年来为多起疾患歧视案、性别歧视案提供了法律援助，并曾于新冠疫情期间公开致信“两会”代表，建议维护新冠肺炎康复者平等就业权。本次发布的《就业反歧视法律实施报告（妇女篇）》聚焦在妇女的平等就业权，该系列报告后续还将会有“疾病篇”、“残障篇”等。
反歧视诉讼：劳动者举证责任重
《就业反歧视法律实施报告（妇女篇）》发现，法院案由分类制度加重了劳动者的举证责任，这一状况亟需改变。2018年12月最高法院发布的《最高人民法院关于增加民事案件案由的通知》增加了“平等就业权纠纷”案由。报告分析了两个发生在北京的妇女劳动者疑似因怀孕和生育而被调岗、降薪的判决书，原告劳动者以“平等就业权纠纷”起诉后，法院要求劳动者承担举证证明用人单位调岗、降薪是基于对怀孕、生育妇女劳动者的歧视而做出的。两位劳动者原告方均因无法完成举证责任败诉。
中国司法系统为就业歧视设置了专门的案由，显然是出于对劳动者平等就业权的重视，实践中却导致举证责任由劳动者一方承担。早在20年前，最高法院已经意识到劳动者举证证明用人单位辞退、降薪理由的难度，因此明确规定了“在劳动争议纠纷案件中，因用人单位作出开除、除名、辞退、解除劳动合同、减少劳动报酬、计算劳动者工作年限等决定而发生劳动争议的，由用人单位负举证责任。”但新增设的案由“平等就业权纠纷”却不属于“劳动争议”，而是属于人格权纠纷项下“一般人格权纠纷”，证明责任分配规则是类推一般侵权纠纷的相关规则，即原告需要承担其主张事实的初步证明责任，并需要反驳被告当事人所提出的一系列反证。劳动者的举证责任反而比劳动争议纠纷案件重得多。
职场性骚扰：用人单位主动解雇施害者
在工作场所性骚扰议题方面，报告中探讨了33个案件的判决、裁定书。报告发现29个案件是发生在同一个用人单位内部同事之间的言语或行为，1件发生在外部业务对接的劳动者之间，3件发生在主播经纪关系、合伙关系中。20个用人单位主动解雇了被指控性骚扰的员工，其中13个被法院认定为合法解除劳动合同无需支付解除劳动合同经济赔偿金，7个被法院认定为不是性骚扰行为或者没有完成举证责任，是违法解除劳动合同，需向劳动者支付违法解除劳动合同赔偿金。7个用人单位在主动解除劳动合同的同时存在拖欠涉嫌性骚扰员工工资、工伤赔偿、业绩绩效工资或年终奖金的情况。3位性骚扰的指控者主张了因性骚扰行为造成的精神损害赔偿，其中2个案件被法院认定为性骚扰主张成立，分别获得5000元 和2000元 精神损害赔偿。
过去不少关于职场性骚扰的研究中都指出，《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》（2019年修订）中第90条第3款规定“与一方当事人或者其代理人有利害关系的证人陈述的证言”不得单独作为认定案件事实的依据。报告发现，广州市中级法院自由裁量，依据两位性骚扰受害者女工的证人证言认定性骚扰行为成立。
报告认为大部分用人单位能够主动解雇被指控实施性骚扰的员工，有可能是得益于最高法院2022年发布的181号指导性案例，其明确了用人单位的管理人员对于被性骚扰员工的投诉，应采取合理措施进行处置。否则用人单位有权解除与管理人员之间的劳动合同。
民间倡导行动：持续遭打压
自从2014年政府持续升级打压民间权利倡导机构、律师界和学术界，倡导性别平等的维权行动持续萎缩。官方目前对于民间组织的倡导行动容忍度极低，不承认民间组织关于就业性别歧视的报告和维权援助。
2023年2月，女权组织“就业性别歧视监察大队”发布了《2023年国家公务员招考性别歧视研究报告》 。报告指出2023年国考共招录17655个岗位，其中有10993个岗位没有性别偏好， 占比62.72%；有6662个岗位存在性别偏好，占比37.73%。存在性别偏好的岗位中，偏好男性的岗位为3787个，占比21.45%；偏好女性岗位为2875个，占比16.28%。偏好男性的岗位比偏好女性的多912个，相关占比高出5.17%。该报告中包含的数据揭示，尽管中国政府在书面文件和法律上支持职场性别平等，但在政府公务员招聘行为中仍然存在持续的性别偏见。
该报告在微信公众号一经发布，立刻被删除。2025年1月20日，就业性别歧视监察大队的微信公众号“煎茶小组”被删除，不再能更新。政府对官方数据、学术界和媒体的高度控制，压制了公众对政府以及更广泛领域中性别偏见程度的了解权。
媒体和商业招聘平台：声援平等就业权
报告搜集到大陆地区颇有影响力的媒体《中国青年报》在一篇《职场隐形歧视怎么破》的报道中采写了4位职场妇女遭遇就业歧视的真实故事，其中包含了年轻女性求职者在面试过程中被询问婚育计划；实习生曝光某大公司的人力资源部门对男性求职者“都要”，对女性求职者则要求面试时重点关注她们的婚育计划；杂志社编辑部主任在生育二胎之后被调离核心业务部门，担任办公室主任负责办公室行政工作，薪水也随之降低；女总监的学历和毕业院校优于同级别男总监，但是工资低于男性同岗位同事。
与此同时，智联招聘（中国知名招聘信息网络平台）发布的《2024女性职场现状调查报告》中显示54%的女性受访者曾遭遇过性别就业歧视，男性仅6.6%。48.8%的女性受访者在面试过程中被用人单位直接询问与性别相关的个人问题（如婚姻状况、是否计划生育等）。女性在同等岗位上的薪酬普遍低于男性10%，尤其是在中高层管理岗位上，这一差距更加明显。33.1%女性受访者因性别遭遇过升职加薪不顺利的问题，9.2%的男性经历过性别歧视阻碍晋升加薪。47.6%的女性受访者曾经在工作酒局中被异性同事或者客户“占便宜”。这些行为无疑限制了妇女的职业选择和发展空间。
建议：促进男女同工同酬，启动公益诉讼程序
报告认为薪资保密协议为企业暗箱操作“同工不同酬”提供空间，无需解释相同岗位不同员工薪资高低原因。这对女员工弊端远远大于好处，使得每个员工之间是孤立的关系，彼此提防，而不是透明、公开竞争的良性关系。考虑到妇女劳动者个体面对企业要求签订薪资保密协议，很难有拒绝的余地，因此工会作为劳动者自由结社形成的群体性组织应当承担此项责任。报告建议，民间组织应积极倡导、说服各地工会将“劳动者有权拒绝签订薪资保密协议”加入劳动者权益告知书中，并要求企业必须将该告知书发放给新入职的劳动者。
目前，各地检察院通过“益心为公”检察云平台线索提起的反就业歧视公益诉讼，集中在招聘广告中的性别歧视。报告建议，妇女劳动者和公益组织向“益心为公”平台举报自己所在的企业男女同工不同酬，孕产期女员工遭遇的降薪、调岗、孤立迫使离职等正在发生或者已经发生的性别歧视行为。鼓励女员工将自己使用益心为公平台的全过程录屏保留，长时间未看到检察院采取行动，仍可作为证据向妇联求助或者向法院起诉。