Today, I saw a certain Shandong enterprise release a rather “shocking” internal requirement: all employees aged 28 to 58, if they do not get married before September 30th of this year, may be fired.
Moreover, this document also blatantly defines the “unmarried” population as “disloyal, unfilial, unkind, and unjust”, as if they are to be charged with a major crime just for not getting a marriage certificate.
At first glance, this regulation is simply baffling: when to get married, shouldn’t it be a matter of personal freedom?
Undoubtedly, enterprises have the right to formulate management systems, but the scope of management must have boundaries.
Marriage itself belongs to personal life and private domain, and threatening with employment opportunities at every turn is really stretching the hand too far.
What’s more exaggerated is that this enterprise not only “issued an ultimatum” to single people, but also made those who are divorced and not yet remarried the target of attack.
What is incomprehensible is that they actually use “moral height” in the document to label employees, believing that “not marrying is a departure from ethics”.
Such moral kidnapping, which is elevated to a high level, seems extremely inappropriate from both legal and common sense perspectives.
In fact, this kind of “operation” that interferes with personal choices is not an isolated case.
Some places recently carried out “lighting projects”, requiring all shops to keep their lights on all night during the Spring Festival, and there was even a situation where management personnel broke into shops and forcibly turned on the lights.
The common point of similar practices is overstepping the authority: it is clear that a department or enterprise wants to achieve a certain goal, but it does not consider the wishes and rights of the parties involved, and simply forces the implementation with a single order, as if there is no need to solicit the opinions of others.
Whether it is “you will be fired if you don’t get married” or “forcibly turning on the shop lights”, it highlights an undeniable domineering thinking: as long as I think it is correct, I can override the basic rights of others with personal or corporate interests.
But in fact, marriage is related to emotions, economy, and life planning, while whether to turn on the lights or not is related to the operating costs and free choices of merchants, which should be decided by the parties themselves.
Tying these personal areas to employment and business licenses, and even labeling those who do not cooperate as “anti-moral”, is precisely a transgression.
Faced with such a “bizarre regulation”, we might as well have more doubts and thoughts. Marriage should follow personal wishes, and no law allows enterprises to force employees to get married immediately by “firing”.
If the company really wants to encourage employees to start a family and establish a career, it can show warmth through caring, welfare, and matchmaking activities, rather than simply putting pressure on them.
As for the “lighting project”, it should be based on guidance and service, taking into account both the city’s image and respecting the economic burden and autonomy of merchants.
If such regulations can really prevail, then can we next force employees to have a second child, and force merchants to provide advertising space for free?
These seemingly extreme conjectures precisely reveal that we should remain vigilant in the face of every seemingly “absurd” event: when someone can arbitrarily formulate rules and force others to obey, it will inevitably lead to the infringement of personal freedom.
Only by promptly raising doubts and calling for supervision can we defend the bottom line of personal rights and social justice when “bizarre regulations” are rampant.
I hope that we can all insist on rational voices in the face of various “absurd orders”, and I also hope that relevant departments will investigate and deal with this phenomenon that obviously violates laws and public order and good customs in a timely manner.
After all, the choice of whether to marry or not, and when to get married and have children, is the freedom that everyone is born with, and it cannot be interfered with by others, nor can it be decoupled from employment.
If there is no bottom-line awareness, the practices of enterprises overstepping their boundaries and local governments strongly promoting will only emerge endlessly, and in the end, it is not only personal happiness that will be damaged, but also the health and harmony of the entire society.
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
