Jugu Sanxi high-floor unit with a panoramic view and terrace (9282BZ)
https://www.sinyi.com.tw/buy/house/9282BZ
Reduced from NT$108.88 million to NT$99.88 million
Welcome to purchase—act quickly. It definitely won’t end up unsold and then be sold at a higher price like the factory.
How could saving people be a drawback? The suppliers are pressing urgently.
Although it’s on the 21st floor, don’t worry—you won’t be given a failing grade after buying it~~~
Case Number:
Taiwan Changhua District Court Civil Ruling No. 34 of 2024
Date of Ruling:
May 31, 2024 (ROC Year 113)
Cause of Case:
Promissory Note Ruling
Taiwan Changhua District Court Civil Ruling
113年度抗字第34號
Appellant: Ming Yueh International Health Technology Co., Ltd.
Legal Representative: Wu Shu-yao
Appellee: Wending International Co., Ltd.
Legal Representative: Wu Lun-yen
Counsel: Attorney Hsu Ying-chieh
Attorney Wang Chi-feng
In the matter of the promissory note ruling between the above-mentioned appellant and appellee, the appellant appealed against this Court’s Summary Division Civil Ruling No. 328 of 2024, dated March 25, 2024. This Court rules as follows:
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of the appeal, in the amount of NT$1,000, shall be borne by the appellant.
REASONS
I. Procedural matters:
The appellant in this case appealed against a disposition made by the judicial affairs officer of this Court pursuant to Article 17-2, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3 of the Court Organization Act and Articles 50 and 54 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act. Pursuant to Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 55 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act and its legislative rationale: “The legislative spirit of Article 485 of the Code of Civil Procedure is hereby referenced in prescribing Paragraph 2. As to whether the district court should at this time act through a panel or a single judge, the district court shall determine this based on the specific circumstances of each case.” Accordingly, this ruling by a single judge of this Court is lawful.
II. The appellee’s claims in the court of first instance and arguments before this Court are summarized as follows:
㈠The appellee holds a promissory note issued by the appellant that waives the requirement of a protest (the “Promissory Note”). However, when the Promissory Note became due, the appellee presented it to the appellant on March 17, 2024, but payment was not made. The appellee therefore applied for a promissory note ruling based on the Promissory Note. The Summary Division of this Court subsequently issued Civil Ruling No. 328 of 2024, permitting compulsory enforcement of the principal amount and interest stated on the Promissory Note (the “Ruling of the Court of First Instance” and the “Original Ruling,” respectively).
㈡The Promissory Note expressly states “unconditionally undertake payment.” Although it also states, “This promissory note is provided as security for a loan of NT$300 million,” this additional wording does not make payment presentation conditional upon an uncertain fact, nor does it alter the undertaking to make unconditional payment. Accordingly, that wording has no effect under the Negotiable Instruments Act and does not affect the validity of the Promissory Note. The appellant’s assertion that the Promissory Note is therefore invalid is untenable. Although the appellant also argues that the face amount differs from the amount of the claim, this concerns a dispute over substantive matters and is unrelated to these non-contentious proceedings; it therefore cannot serve as grounds for appeal. The appellee accordingly requested dismissal of the appeal.
III. The appellant’s grounds of appeal are summarized as follows:
㈠The Promissory Note contains an adverse notation and therefore has no effect as a promissory note and is an invalid negotiable instrument:
⒈Although the front of the Promissory Note states, “This promissory note is provided as security for a loan of NT$300 million,” Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the loan agreement signed by the parties (Appellant’s Exhibit 1) provides that, simultaneously with the loan, the parties had already provided substantial security consisting of the land owned by the appellant located at land lots 000, 000, 000, and 000, ○○ Section, ○○ Township, Changhua County, and buildings with building numbers 245-2, 245-3, and 420 in the same section. Paragraph 2 of the same article provides: “Upon receiving the loan, Party A shall issue and deliver to Party B one promissory note with a face amount of exactly NT$300 million.”
⒉Accordingly, based on the parties’ true intent, it is apparent that, because the parties already had the real property specified in Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the loan agreement as security, the Promissory Note was provided solely for security purposes. This is why the front of the Promissory Note states, “This promissory note is provided as security for a loan of NT$300 million.” However, this conflicts with the wording shown on the face of the note, “Payable unconditionally on [year] [month] [day] upon presentation,” and does not comply with Article 120, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Thus, the condition stated on the Promissory Note—“This promissory note is provided as security for a loan of NT$300 million”—is inconsistent with the nature of a promissory note and contravenes the law. It constitutes an “adverse notation” and therefore produces no effect as a negotiable instrument.
㈡The amount of the parties’ claim up to the date on which the security was finalized should be NT$210,000,000, and the appellee’s claim based on the NT$300 million face amount of the Promissory Note is mistaken:
The basis for the claim for punitive liquidated damages in this case is Article 9 of the loan agreement: “Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, if either party to this Agreement breaches any provision hereof and fails to cure the breach within the period specified in the other party’s written notice, the breaching party shall, in addition to being liable to the other party for damages, pay the other party punitive liquidated damages of NT$10 million.” The appellant does not dispute that it failed to comply with Article 1, Paragraph 7 of the loan agreement, which provides: “Party A (i.e., the appellant) shall, upon expiration of the agreed loan period, fully repay the principal, interest, and related expenses in one lump sum, and shall remit the repayment to the account designated by Party B (i.e., the appellee),” and that, after the appellee demanded payment by certified letter, it failed to repay the loan and interest by the due date. Nevertheless, under Article 9 of the loan agreement, the appellee has only the right to claim punitive liquidated damages of NT$10 million from the appellant. The appellee instead directly claims the note amount based on the NT$300 million face amount of the Promissory Note, which is mistaken and clearly inconsistent with the loan agreement.
IV. This Court’s determination:
㈠A person who signs a negotiable instrument is liable according to the wording stated on the instrument; when two or more persons sign jointly, they are jointly and severally liable. Article 5 of the Negotiable Instruments Act expressly provides so. Furthermore, although a promissory note may contain a waiver of the requirement to make a protest, the holder must still present it for acceptance or payment within the prescribed period; however, the burden of proving non-presentation lies with the person asserting that the holder failed to present it. Article 124 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, applying Article 95 mutatis mutandis, expressly provides so.
㈡Furthermore, when exercising recourse against the maker of a promissory note, the holder may apply to the court for a ruling and then seek compulsory enforcement; Article 123 of the Negotiable Instruments Act expressly provides so. Under the foregoing provision, an application by the holder of a promissory note for a court ruling permitting compulsory enforcement against the maker is, in nature, a non-contentious matter. The ruling on such application and the ruling of the appellate court merely examine, under non-contentious procedures, whether compulsory enforcement should be permitted; they do not have the effect of conclusively determining whether a substantive legal relationship exists. If the maker disputes the existence of the note debt, the maker should separately bring an action for declaratory judgment to resolve the matter (see the purport of Supreme Court precedent Tai-Kang-Zi No. 76 of 1968).
㈢The appellee applied under Article 123 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a ruling permitting compulsory enforcement of the Promissory Note and submitted the Promissory Note, which is consistent with its allegations, as evidence. Since the appellant signed and affixed its seal to the Promissory Note, under the foregoing explanation it must be liable according to the wording stated on the instrument. The Original Ruling, which granted the application following a formal examination, contains no defect.
㈣The appellant first argues that the Promissory Note contains an adverse notation and is invalid. The wording on the Promissory Note—“This promissory note is provided as security for a loan of NT$300 million”—merely explains the underlying cause relationship of the instrument. It does not specify when, where, or by whom the funds must be collected, nor does it delete the statement on the face of the note that payment is to be made unconditionally. Based on the abstract nature of negotiable instruments, the appellant may not refuse a payment request by another holder of the instrument on the ground that the funds were provided as security for a loan. The wording that payment is to be made unconditionally is therefore unaffected. Accordingly, under Article 12 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the notation has no effect under negotiable instruments law, but does not affect the validity of the Promissory Note. The appellant’s claim that the Promissory Note is invalid is therefore untenable.
㈤The appellant next argues that the amount of the parties’ claim up to the date on which the security was finalized should be NT$210,000,000, and that the appellee’s claim based on the NT$300 million Promissory Note is mistaken. However, this concerns a dispute over rights and obligations under substantive law and is not an issue that may be examined in these non-contentious proceedings. The appellant’s argument that the face amount of the Promissory Note exceeds the actual debt and therefore cannot be enforced is likewise untenable. Even if the grounds of appeal were true, the appellant should seek relief through litigation in accordance with law.
㈥In light of the foregoing, the appellant’s allegation that the Original Ruling was improper and its request that it be vacated are without merit. The appeal should therefore be dismissed.
V. For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is without merit. Pursuant to Article 21, Paragraph 2 and Article 46 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act, and Article 495-1, Paragraph 1, Article 449, Paragraph 1, Article 95, Article 78, and Article 87 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the ruling is rendered as stated in the Order.
Republic of China Year 113, May 31, 2024
Civil Division Four Judge Li Yen-sun
This is a certified true copy of the original.
Except on the ground that the applicable law was manifestly erroneously applied, no further appeal may be filed against this ruling. If a further appeal is filed, an attorney must be appointed as agent and a further appeal petition must be submitted to this Court within 10 days after receipt, together with payment of the NT$1,000 further-appeal court fee.
Republic of China Year 113, May 31, 2024
Clerk Liao Han-hsuan
The appellant’s allegation that the Original Ruling was improper and its request that it be vacated are without merit. The appeal should therefore be dismissed.
Lihe (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd. went bankrupt, defaulting on employees’ wages and social insurance contributions. During the arbitration proceedings, it transferred its assets. The employees collectively went to stand outside the county government holding signs, requesting that the government take over the enterprise.
https://twitter.com/gczy1848worker/status/1778614684675137875
General Manager Wu, Director Wang, huan, migrant workers’ hard-earned money
https://twitter.com/gczy1848worker/status/1778614684675137875
0:53 -0:54
Safeguard the hard-earned money of the vast number of migrant workers; unscrupulous companies should be subject to government oversight
https://m.douyin.com/share/video/7356250651019595020
Safeguard the hard-earned money of the vast number of migrant workers; unscrupulous companies should be subject to government oversight
https://m.douyin.com/share/video/7356250651019595020
Case number:
Civil Ruling No. 48 of 2024, Taiwan Changhua District Court, Judicial Auction Division
Date of ruling:
April 19, 2024 (ROC Year 113)
Case subject:
Auction of mortgaged property
Civil Ruling of the Simplified Division, Taiwan Changhua District Court
113年度司拍字第48號
Applicant: Wending International Co., Ltd.
Legal representative: Wu Lunyan
Respondent: Mingyue International Health Technology Co., Ltd.
Legal representative: Wu Shuyao
In the matter of the above parties’ application for the auction of mortgaged property, this Court rules as follows:
Main Text
The real properties owned by the Respondent, as listed in the attached schedules, are approved for auction.
The application procedural fee of NT$5,000 shall be borne by the Respondent.
Reasons
I. Pursuant to Article 873, Paragraph 1 of the Civil Code, where a mortgagee has not been paid after the secured claim has become due, the mortgagee may apply to the court for the auction of the mortgaged property and be paid from the proceeds of the sale. The foregoing provision applies mutatis mutandis to maximum-amount mortgages, as expressly provided in Article 881-17 of the same Code.
II. The gist of the application is as follows: The Respondent, Mingyue International Health Technology Co., Ltd., established a maximum-amount mortgage of NT$300 million (same below) over the real properties listed in the attached schedules, which it owns, as security for all debts, including loans, owed to the Applicant; the mortgage has been duly registered. In addition, on March 14, 2023 (same below), the Respondent borrowed NT$200 million from the Applicant, with the loan term running from March 17, 2023, to March 16, 2024. As the Respondent failed to pay upon maturity, the secured claim amount as of the date on which the secured claims were determined was NT$260,000,000. Accordingly, the Applicant seeks approval for the auction of the mortgaged property to obtain repayment.
III. Upon examination, the Applicant’s foregoing assertions are supported by copies of the loan agreement, certificate of other rights, mortgage creation agreement, checks, promissory notes, and Class II transcripts of the land and building registrations. It is confirmed that the maximum-amount mortgage in this case was duly created and registered and that a mortgage-secured claim exists. Based on the foregoing documents submitted by the Applicant, it may be formally determined that the mortgage-secured claim has become due and remains unpaid. Therefore, this application satisfies the requirements for an application to auction mortgaged property. Furthermore, pursuant to Article 74 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act, this Court notified the Respondent to state its views regarding the amount of the claim secured by the foregoing mortgage. The Respondent submitted a written statement asserting that the claim amount should be NT$210,000,000 and that the parties were actively negotiating. However, the Applicant has formally denied these assertions. Moreover, a ruling approving the auction of mortgaged property is based on a formal examination and does not have the effect of conclusively determining whether a substantive legal relationship exists. If the Respondent has a substantive dispute regarding the existence or amount of the claim, the matter should be resolved through separate litigation, as it cannot be examined in the non-contentious proceedings for the auction of mortgaged property. Accordingly, the Applicant’s application for the auction of the real properties listed in the attached schedules is approved pursuant to the aforementioned provisions.
IV. Pursuant to Article 21, Paragraph 2 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act and Article 78 of the Code of Civil Procedure, this ruling is rendered as set forth in the Main Text.
V. If dissatisfied with this ruling, an interlocutory appeal shall be filed with this Court within 10 days after service of the ruling (a copy for service must be attached), together with payment of an interlocutory appeal fee of NT$1,000. Any interested person who disputes the legal relationship on which the application is based may file an action to contest it.
Republic of China 113, April 19, 2024
Judicial Affairs Officer of the Simplified Division: Jian Haozhi
Attached Schedule: (Land)
113年度司拍字第000048號
No.
Land location
Land
Area
Extent of rights
Remarks
County/City
Township/Urban District
Section
Subsection
Lot No.
Category
Hectares
Are
Square meters
001
Changhua County
Puxin Township
Wayao North
0000-0000
15,779.01
Entirety
002
Changhua County
Puxin Township
Wayao North
0000-0000
8,050.81
Entirety
003
Changhua County
Puxin Township
Wayao North
0000-0000
2,619.00
Entirety
004
Changhua County
Puxin Township
Wayao North
0000-0000
1,940.33
Entirety
005
Changhua County
Puxin Township
Wayao North
0000-0000
1,387.99
Entirety
Attached Schedule: (Buildings)
113年度司拍字第000048號
No.
Building style and principal
Building area (square meters)
Extent of
Building No.
Building address
Location of site
building materials
Floor area
Principal ancillary building
Remarks
building materials
rights
No.
and number of stories
Total
and use
001
00000-000
No. 000, Section 0, ○○ Road, ○○ Township, Changhua County
Lot 000000000, ○○○ Section, ○○ Township, Changhua County
Steel-frame and reinforced-concrete structure, without walls; industrial use; 4 stories
First floor: 1,964.24;
Second floor: 1,887.20;
Third floor: 1,887.20;
Fourth floor: 152.82;
Total area: 5,891.46
Balcony, area: 39.30; elevator/stairwell, area: 34.20
Entirety
002
00000-000
No. 000, Section 0, ○○ Road, ○○ Township, Changhua County
Lot 000000000, ○○○ Section, ○○ Township, Changhua County
Without walls, reinforced-concrete structure, steel frame; industrial use; 4 stories
First floor: 3,532.78;
Second floor: 3,510.00;
Third floor: 3,510.00;
Fourth floor: 1,755.00;
Total area: 12,307.78
Balcony, area: 61.80; elevator/stairwell, area: 23.14
Entirety
003
00000-000
No. 000, Section 0, ○○ Road, ○○ Township, Changhua County
Lots 0000-0000, 0000-0000, and 0000-0000, Wayao North Section, Puxin Township, Changhua County
Steel-frame and reinforced-concrete structure; factory, offices, labor welfare facilities, stairwell, guard room, outdoor toilet, machine room; 4 stories
First floor: 1,180.29;
Second floor: 829.03;
Third floor: 947.67;
Fourth floor: 947.67;
Rooftop projection: 71.18;
Total area: 3,975.84
Balcony, area: 33.39
Entirety
The Respondent failed to pay upon the debt’s maturity
Lihé (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd. Notice Regarding Cessation of Operations and Bankruptcy Liquidation
To all assisting manufacturers, customers, banks, investors, and all colleagues of Lihé Company:
It is with great regret that we inform you that, due to various reasons including poor management, the impact of the three-year pandemic, and changes in the market environment, Lihé (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd. has, in recent years, been affected by drastic changes in the overall environment. In addition, assisting manufacturers have pursued their claims and banks have demanded payment of matured amounts, resulting in a series of impacts: the company has fallen into a debt crisis and its accounts have been judicially frozen. The company’s assets are now insufficient to repay its debts. Lihé (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd. has no choice but to announce the cessation of operations and enter judicial bankruptcy liquidation proceedings. Lihé (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd. and its management team deeply regret this unexpected outcome.
We understand that, as our customers, suppliers, and colleagues, your trust in and support for Lihé (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd. have been the most important driving force behind the company’s existence and development. We hereby express our gratitude to you and promise to make every effort to properly handle all matters concerning you, ensuring that your rights and interests are not harmed.
We have now decided to cease operations on March 31, 2024. We will initiate bankruptcy liquidation proceedings in accordance with the law and apply to the relevant government authorities and the court for bankruptcy liquidation, so as to protect the legitimate rights and interests of all parties in accordance with the law. All creditors and employees may reconcile their accounts with us and confirm their respective claims, outstanding wages, economic compensation (based on length of service), social security and medical insurance fees, and other amounts. You may also protect your rights and interests through judicial proceedings in accordance with the law. We will contact you by email or telephone to provide information regarding the progress of the bankruptcy liquidation and the repayment of debts. We feel deeply guilty and regretful about our closure and once again express our deepest apologies to everyone.
Notifying entity: Lihé (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd.
April 1, 2024
Poor management
Debts must be repaid—it is only right and proper.
1. https://judgment.judicial.gov.tw/LAW_Mobile_FJUD/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=CHDV%2c113%2c%e5%8f%b8%e7%a5%a8%2c382%2c20240325%2c1&ot=in
Taiwan Changhua District Court Summary Division Civil Ruling
Case No. 113 Si-Piao No. 382
Applicant: Wending International Co., Ltd.
Legal Representative: Wu Lun-Yen
Respondent: Mingyue International Health Technology Co., Ltd.
Legal Representative: Wu Shu-Yao
In the matter of the above parties’ application for a ruling on a promissory note, this Court rules as follows:
Main Text
The respondent shall pay the applicant NT$300,000,000, as stated in the promissory note issued on March 17, 2023 (ROC Year 112), together with interest calculated at an annual rate of 6% from March 18, 2024 (ROC Year 113) until the date of repayment. Compulsory execution is permitted.
The application procedure fee of NT$5,000 shall be borne by the respondent.
Reasons
I. The substance of the applicant’s application is as follows: The applicant holds a promissory note issued by the respondent on March 17, 2023 (ROC Year 112), waiving the requirement to make a protest (Note No. TH0000000), stating an amount of NT$300,000,000, with no maturity date specified. However, when presented on March 17, 2024 (ROC Year 113), the amount and interest stated in the Main Text remained unpaid. The applicant therefore submitted the promissory note and applied for a ruling permitting compulsory execution.
II. This application conforms to Article 123 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and should be granted.
III. Pursuant to Paragraph 2 of Article 21 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act and Article 78 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the ruling is as stated in the Main Text.
IV. If dissatisfied with this ruling, an interlocutory appeal shall be filed with this Court within 10 days after service of the ruling (a transcript must be attached), together with payment of an appeal fee of NT$1,000. If the drawer claims that the promissory note was forged or altered, the drawer may, within 20 days after service of this ruling, separately file an action for confirmation against the holder with this Court. If the drawer has filed an action for confirmation, the drawer may apply to the court to stay execution pursuant to Article 195 of the Non-Contentious Matters Act.
Republic of China 113, March 25
Judicial Affairs Officer of the Summary Division: Chien Hao-Chih
Note: The applicant must, within 5 days, report other possible addresses for service on the respondent, so as to avoid invalidity due to improper service.
2. https://m.tianyancha.com/proclamation?id=4ozzmo97m1775ce72a2dda1a3l51md99&name=%E7%AB%8B%E5%92%8C%EF%BC%88%E6%BC%B3%E5%B7%9E%EF%BC%89%E5%AE%9E%E4%B8%9A%E6%9C%89%E9%99%90%E5%85%AC%E5%8F%B8&gid=undefined
Nature of case
Dispute over a financial loan contract
Case number
(2024) Min 0602 Min Chu No. 2725
Prosecutor/Plaintiff/Appellant/Applicant
Industrial Bank Co., Ltd., Zhangzhou Branch
Defendant/Respondent/Appellee/Respondent in the application
Lihe (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd.,
Wang Xuanzhen,
Wu Shu-Yao
Hearing time
2024-07-02 09:00
Scheduled date
-
Parties
Industrial Bank Co., Ltd., Zhangzhou Branch,
Lihe (Zhangzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd.,
Division handling the case
-
Presiding judge/Trial judge
-
Court
People’s Court of Xiangcheng District, Zhangzhou City
Courtroom
Vendors’ self-rescue association
https://www.colliers.com/zh-tw/news/230221-entrusted-to-handle-the-bidding-case-of-changhua-county
March 31 is the grand day of the company’s tender. Since the sweeping reforms launched by the parachuted-in forces began in 2021, there have been approximately five rounds of layoffs and numerous personnel changes over the past two years. The so-called good operating results are there for all to see. At present, the Lin faction continues to lead the company team in achieving the best results. Lin x Han is a talented person who worked his way up from the basics and was also stationed at a factory in mainland China. He is a senior executive who is extremely eager to ship products and unable to consider the consequences, having caused the company’s assembly rework to occur multiple times. He is also a production-control professional who has led several production lines; his ability to take credit is first-rate, which is why he has been able to manage the current good results. The Puxin plant has finally reached the tender-opening stage. Where will the company go from here? Will the wise, mighty, and great person in charge continue to lead everyone in creating the next glorious chapter? Everyone who should have left has left, so those remaining have no reason to keep making excuses, right? In the future, we will gradually discover that the more familiar people are, the more likely they are to be where the problems lie? And the price paid by the company has been extremely high!
No improvements are needed; when the boat reaches the bridge, it will naturally go straight. I believe
we will find the answers in the future!
The value of an excellent company lies in allowing employees to fully发挥 their professional strengths. Here, regardless of your salary or position, you can passively take on duties related or unrelated to your role,发挥 them until you can no longer发挥! Although the salary is limited, the sense of achievement is infinite, so never use vulgar money or year-end bonuses as a measure; instead, thoughtfully savor every moment that can prove yourself! As long as conversations are filled with lofty, high-minded air, blame-shifting and shirking responsibility are handled like a white lotus untouched by mud, excellent plans for selling short and empty promises are marketed, and scheming attacks and defenses strike from the shadows, even without a physical company or factory, everyone can still become a dragon among men and a rising star of tomorrow!
The key to thriving here is to curry favor with your immediate relatives; those who have already curried favor with immediate relatives must be courted even more!
When it comes to loyalty to the company, who could surpass me? Resigning outright has never been an option! The New Year is finally almost here, and something surprising happens after every New Year. Isn’t the severance pay I’ve been longing for right in front of me?
Wishing everyone a Happy New Year!
There is absolutely no need to improve anything—by all means, keep it exactly as it is; everyone will be delighted!
A delightful, intoxicating, gratitude-filled company with a Buddha-like spirit—the only choice for joining hands to achieve financial freedom!
The environment is magnificent, splendid, and elegant! The meals are exquisitely delicious and refined! Managers are professional, kind, approachable, and responsible! The boss is humble, self-reflective, generous, and magnanimous! Salaries are transparent and generous, with rewards based on merit! The future is bright, brilliant, blessed, and prosperous!
The company always has so many applicants that applications are full and never lacking. To conduct preliminary elimination and screening, and to deter passersby with no intention of working hard together with the company from merely testing the waters and letting negative elements infiltrate the outstanding team, there are all those frightening statements above!
Just look up this company on Google and you will know that its great achievements and prospects are promising! Study the financial reports and you will be secretly delighted, as the company rises steadily and fills its coffers! Witnessing the organizational chart is even more thrilling, with outstanding elites from every field coming together!
We sincerely welcome employees who are meant to join us! Let us create the world’s ninth wonder together!
What are the drawbacks? I’ve never heard of, seen, or encountered any. Things that don’t exist shouldn’t be discussed!
Lin 0 Fang, Senior Manager of the Business Department; Zhang 0 Sheng, Deputy Manager of the Administration Department
(When Consultant Yuan was providing guidance)
Wasn't it said that we were all in the same boat, that we would share joys and hardships, and that working together would make the company better and better? So why has everyone resigned?
What was said was very moving, but it seems that the words and actions were not carried out in tandem!
Wasn't it said that one must bear legal responsibility for the words one speaks? So why delete the good advice you yourself gave?
I believe justice is in the hearts of the people. One should spare others when possible, and do not do unto others what you would not want done to yourself.
When conducting oneself and dealing with matters inappropriately, this really does not look good!
Leaving some leeway in human relationships is also to make one's own path easier in the future!
None
1. The company is beautiful, and the surroundings are quiet.
2. You have to arrive at the company at 7:40 a.m. for the group attendance check.
(If your attendance is not recorded, you will be marked late and receive a demerit point; after accumulating three instances, a public notice will be posted on the bulletin board.)
3. As long as they are senior employees, people may smoke during working hours.
Smoking area in the parking lot of Building C
(Quality control personnel, administration department personnel, and manufacturing department personnel)
Smoking area behind Building B
(“Black-body” personnel and quality control personnel responsible for assembly inspection)
Newcomers and foreign workers are not allowed to smoke and will receive a major demerit!
4. There are many surveillance cameras around the company, which can protect your safety at any time.
5. There are limited restrooms. By 9:00, the company’s restrooms will be full.
6. Everyone acts as a discipline monitor, taking photos and videos specifically to catch violations and submit them for public posting. You catch me, I catch you—it’s very entertaining.
7. The Manufacturing Division, Quality Control Department, and Warehouse Management Department (the area on the second floor)
start picking up boxed lunches at 11:45. Other frontline personnel have to line up and register in order after the bell rings.
Production Management Classics:
1. There are many parachuted-in managers who pretend to understand things they do not.
(If your experience is impressive, you can come, because the stage is huge and you can use it however you want; when something goes wrong, just push the blame onto the frontline.)
There is a “black-body” supervisor called Section Chief Liu. While frontline personnel were busy packing orders, he insisted on getting involved. He even used working hours to go back to his own home to pick up a piece of private equipment and had on-site personnel use it. Does the production line not even have a section chief? What a mess.
Before going to mainland China, he even tried to cram at the last minute and did not know how to use automatic-arm welding.
A deputy section chief from Chien Hsin University also came to the production line, randomly dispatching production-line personnel, affecting efficiency and causing work not to be completed. He could only push the cleanup back onto the frontline personnel.
Once, when boxed lunches were being distributed during overtime, this manager entered the wrong lunch order. He even tried to exchange it with someone else for instant noodles. Outrageous!
2. The warehouse is packed full of goods from mainland China. On rainy days, everything becomes chaotic, with goods being moved around constantly.
3. In the “black-body” section, there is a technician surnamed Ke. When a false weld on the production line’s main frame was discovered by quality control, he still wanted the production-line personnel to push it over to them. It was clearly because your side had done a poor job. When unhappy, he often raises his voice and curses indiscriminately. The main frame is either welded incorrectly or has false welds—aren’t technicians supposed to handle problems? Shouldn’t the production line be the ones getting angry? Is moving things back and forth fun?
4. The paint-shop supervisor changes frequently, and the painting is often done poorly or not completed in time, forcing production-line personnel to take unpaid leave or pull weeds like farmhands.
5. Assembly often rushes production and frequently encounters problems requiring rework. Doesn’t rework cost money?
Company Benefits
(The welfare committee chairperson is terrible, and there are hardly any benefits.
Employees are also charged a welfare fee every month.)
1. Birthday gift certificates used to be NT$500 PX Mart gift certificates.
Now they are only Decathlon discount coupons, and things there are very expensive.
2. After working for a year, I still have never seen a year-end party or spring banquet.
3. After working for a year, there has still been no employee trip.
4. When year-end bonuses were about to be distributed, the Human Resources Department said that anyone who had not been vaccinated would not receive a bonus.
The announcement was issued one week before the bonuses were distributed, and even employees who had completed their vaccinations did not receive the bonus.
5. After the Lunar New Year, large numbers of frontline employees were laid off.
Meanwhile, senior management members were promoted and given raises one after another—so wonderful!
A Listed Emerging-Stock Company
1. Last year, they kept saying the company was going to go public and asked employees to fully cooperate by working overtime to rush orders. Since the parachuted-in personnel arrived, things have turned out great: now the company is going to be delisted.
So many advantages, no disadvantages.
This company really is a great place to train your skills and increase your abilities!
Don’t come when nothing is happening; come when there is something to do!
There are no disadvantages.
The company is beautiful
The company brought in a consultant, Yuan Mullin.
He previously worked at Want Want and Wanda Pet.
https://www.qollie.com/comments/5ae91a30591d9c00daeb9d78
Four years ago, when I looked into his record at Wanda Pet, it was the same as now:
He takes credit for everything, constantly framing people and claiming all their achievements as his own.
He keeps holding meetings and calling them classes, but they are all just listening to him bluff and tell stories.
He said he would take the company public, but the company’s performance has declined to this point. It would be a miracle if it does not collapse.
He constantly transfers personnel, claiming it is for learning, but in reality he is forcing people out and ostracizing them until those he dislikes resign.
He installs his own people, who receive high salaries but do no work, and calls them elite reinforcements even though they cannot do anything when they arrive.
He forces employees to participate in group purchases, and they can only buy Homopod mini, iPad Pro, earphones, microphones, and wheel rims from him.
Employees have paid more than a million in group purchases. The prices are higher than market prices; he says it is insurance, but he takes the extra equipment and price differences for himself, and even the boss dares not say anything.
The company buys piles of computers, cars, desk lamps, and Wi-Fi equipment. I do not know what they are thinking.
He forces employees to transfer money to him, ranging from NT$1,000 to several hundred dollars, claiming it is tuition for classes.
Every employee is required to borrow money, with each person borrowing several million to invest in the company he established.
After work and during holidays, he forces employees to write reports and reflections and make recordings, with deadlines imposed. In the middle of the night, he makes employees listen to music with him until dawn.
The first thing after the New Year holiday was to make employees write a list of layoffs for their own departments, while threatening them not to share it.
Every day he says Mingyao is going under and tells employees to sell their shares quickly and resign quickly.
Look at Wanda Pet’s history:
He installs his own people, gets others removed, ruins the company and dilutes the equity, then opens a holding company to invest and acquire it.
Very familiar.
I do not know what the boss is thinking.
How could he turn such a good company into this?
Anyone who sees this, take my advice: do not join this company.
The world is beautiful. You deserve better.
The lunch is pretty tasty.
The company posts a bunch of job openings, but you have absolutely no idea what you’re supposed to do after you’re hired. The job titles are deliberately written ambiguously, and once you join, they randomly dump a whole bunch of tasks on you. Neither HR nor the managers seem to know what they’re doing—it’s basically just hiring people without any strategy!
The managers also don’t take responsibility for anything. They just push employees out to get yelled at by the boss. Basically, it’s a family business, so don’t expect to have much of a career path there, because in the end everything will be passed on to the boss’s children. The company has a very high turnover rate, with people leaving every month. Colleagues don’t help one another either, so it’s a fairly toxic work environment.