Does the company's payment of part of employees' wages through recharge accounts constitute "full payment of labor remuneration"?

As the forms of employment become increasingly diverse,

the methods of wage payment have also sparked new disputes.

Employers sometimes distribute part of employees’ wages

in the form of recharge points, vouchers, and other non-cash methods,

does this constitute “full payment of labor remuneration”?

Can workers claim economic compensation based on this?

(Source: Internet, delete if infringing)

Basic Case Facts

Li Mou was employed by a certain company in November 2020, and both parties signed two fixed-term employment contracts. In December 2024, when the company paid Li Mou’s November wages, it transferred 7,000 yuan via bank transfer, and the next day, an additional 1,000 yuan was recharged into the company’s internal system account for Li Mou.

In January 2025, Li Mou mailed a “Notice of Termination of Employment Contract” to the company, alleging that the company had not paid full wages in a timely manner and had forced recharge consumption. The company received the notice the next day. Later, Li Mou applied for labor arbitration, demanding economic compensation from the company. The arbitration committee supported his claim. The company was dissatisfied with the arbitration award and filed a lawsuit.

During the trial, Li Mou submitted evidence such as wage statements and chat records, proving that in November 2024, 1,000 yuan was indeed recharged into the system account, and he had repeatedly raised objections to the company.

The company argued that the recharge was a form of welfare distribution, not part of the wages, and that the amount had been subsequently paid in cash.

Court’s Judgment

The court held that, according to Article 50 of the Labor Law of the People’s Republic of China and Article 5 of the Interim Regulations on Wage Payment, wages must be paid in monetary form monthly directly to the employee and cannot be replaced by physical objects or securities of value. The company’s practice of recharging part of the employee’s wages into an internal consumption system, while usable for consumption, does not have the functions of monetary payment and circulation, effectively restricting the employee’s autonomous control over wages, which violates the mandatory legal provisions on wage payment. Even if the 1,000 yuan was later paid in the subsequent wages, since this payment occurred after the termination of the employment relationship, it does not affect the fact that wages were not fully paid at the time of termination. Li Mou’s claim for termination of the employment contract due to the company’s failure to pay wages in full and on time, which entitles him to economic compensation under Article 46 of the Labor Contract Law, was supported. The court thus ordered the company to pay Li Mou economic compensation.

After the first-instance judgment, the company appealed. The second-instance court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment. The company has now voluntarily fulfilled the judgment.

Judge’s Opinion

Wages are the economic foundation for the survival and development of workers and their families. Paying wages in full and on time in monetary form is an unavoidable legal obligation of employers. Employers must not replace wage payments with recharge cards, points, vouchers, or other non-monetary forms, as doing so not only infringes on workers’ legal rights but may also disrupt public order.

In this case, the court explicitly rejected the legality of replacing wages with internal consumption credits, safeguarding workers’ full control over their wages. This also serves as a reminder to employers to strictly comply with wage payment regulations and avoid labor disputes caused by improper payment methods.

Source: People’s Court Daily, Shandong High People’s Court

【Source: Dongying Intermediate People’s Court】