转发：企.业.必.备.的.劳.动.法.及用工问题.应.对.体.系

[纪舅]

发 件 人:"纪舅" 
收 件 人:"linux-nvdimm" ;
发送时间:2017-10-24 10:30:04
课程信息：

新《劳动合同法》、《社会保险法》、《工伤保险条例》实操应对策与有效调岗调薪、裁员解雇及违纪问题员工处理技 
注明：该课程2天为一个单元，A单元与B单元内容是完全独立的不分先后顺序，客户可根据自己需求选择参加A单元或者B单元，或AB单元均参加，可以参加完A单元再参加B单元或者先参加B单元再参加A单元均可！
课 程 特 色：
稀缺性：此课程将劳动法体系和薪酬绩效管理体系紧密相结合，国内极少出现此类课程。
针对性：课程内容精选了过去5年来主讲老师亲自处理过的且在不少用人单位内部也曾发生过的代表性案例，这些案例完全符合中国现阶段的大环境、大气候、大趋势，极具参考性和启发性。
实战性：实战沙盘演练，学员深入思考与充分互动，老师毫不保留倾囊相授；学员把错误留在课堂，把正确的观点、方法、工具、技能带回去。
课 程 收 益：
1、全面了解劳动用工过程的法律风险；
2、理解与劳动用工有关的政策法律法规；
3、培养预测、分析劳动用工法律风险的思维；
4、掌握预防和应对风险的实战技能及方法工具……
课 程 大 纲：
A单元内容（共2天，20个以上经典案例）
专题一：招聘入职
1.如何预防劳动者的“应聘欺诈”，如何证明劳动者的“欺诈”？
2.招收应届毕业生，应注意哪些细节问题？
3.招用达到法定退休年龄的人员，应注意哪些细节问题？
4.招用待岗、内退、停薪留职的人员，应注意哪些细节问题？
5.入职体检需注意哪些细节问题？
6.入职前后用人单位应告知劳动者哪些情况，如何保留证据？
7.《入职登记表》如何设计，才能起到预防法律风险的作用？
8.劳动者无法提交《离职证明》，该怎么办？
9.企业如何书写《录用通知书》，其法律风险有哪些？
专题二：劳动合同订立
1.用人单位自行拟定的劳动合同文本是否有效，是否需要进行备案？
2.劳动者借故拖延或拒绝签订劳动合同，用人单位如何应对？
3.未签订劳动合同，需支付多长期限的双倍工资？是否受到仲裁时效的限制？
4.劳动合同期满，继续留用劳动者，但未续签合同，是否也需支付双倍工资？
5.什么时候为最佳时间，签署劳动合同、用工协议？
6.法律禁止2次约定试用期，劳动合同期限和试用期限该如何约定？
7.用人单位收购其他组织时，如何与被接收的员工签订、变更劳动合同？
8.应否与属于职业经理人的法人代表签订劳动合同？
专题三：试用期
1.可否先试用后签合同，可否单独签订试用期协议？ 
2.员工主动申请延长试用期，该怎样操作，才规避赔偿风险？
3.试用期满后辞退员工，最少赔2个月工资，该如何化解？
4.试用期最后一天辞退员工，赔偿概率为70%，如何化解？
5.试用期满前几天辞退员工，赔偿概率为50%，如何化解？
6.不符合录用条件的范围包括哪些，如何取证证明？
7.《试用期辞退通知书》如何书写，以避免违法解除的赔偿金？
8.出现“经济性裁员”情况，优先裁掉试用期的新员工，合法吗？
9.试用期员工经常请假休假，导致难以对其观察考核，如何处理？
专题四：无固定期限劳动合同
1.无固定期限劳动合同到底是不是铁饭碗，会不会增加企业成本？
2.无固定期限劳动合同解除的条件、理由有哪些？
3.用人单位拒绝签订无固定期限劳动合同，有何风险？
4.签订了固定期限劳动合同的员工，期间工作累计满10年，能否要求将固定期限合同变更为无固定期限合同？
5.连续订立二次固定期限劳动合同到期，用人单位能否终止合同；员工提出签订无固定期限合同，用人单位能否拒绝？
6.合同期满劳动者由于医疗期、三期等原因续延劳动合同导致劳动者连续工作满十年，劳动者提出订立无固定期限劳动合同的，用人单位能否拒绝？
专题五：培训、保密与竞业限制
1.培训服务期与劳动合同期限有何不同，劳动合同期限与服务期限发生冲突时如何适用？
2.培训服务期未到期，而劳动合同到期，用人单位终止劳动合同的，是否属于提前解除劳动合同，如何规避？
3.劳动者严重过错被解雇，用人单位能否依据服务期约定要求劳动者支付违约金？
4.在什么情况下，可签署竞业限制协议？
5.在什么时候，企业更有主动权签署竞业限制协议？
6.无约定经济补偿的支付，竞业限制是否有效？
7.竞业限制的经济补偿的标准如何界定？
8.要求员工保密，企业需要支付保密工资吗？
9.培训协议、保密协议、竞业限制协议的核心条款！
专题六：劳动关系解除终止
1.双方协商解除劳动合同并约定支付适当的经济补偿，事后劳动者追讨经济补偿的差额部分，仲裁机构有可能支持劳动者的诉求，企业如何避免案件败诉？
2.能否与“三期妇女、特殊保护期间的员工”协商解除，如何规避风险？
3.员工未提前30日通知企业即自行离职，企业能否扣减其工资？
4.员工提交辞职信后的30天内，企业批准其离职，可能有风险，如何化解？
5.员工提交辞职信后的30天后，企业批准其离职，也可能有风险，如何化解？
6.对于患病员工，能否解除，如何操作才能降低法律风险？
7.实行末位淘汰制，以末位排名为由解雇员工，往往被认定非法解雇，企业该如何做，才避免案件败诉？
8.以“组织架构调整，无合适岗位安排”为由解雇员工，感觉非常符合常理，但往往被认定非法解雇，企业该如何做才避免风险？
9.以“经济性裁员”名义解雇员工，感觉非常符合常理，但往往被认定非法解雇，企业该如何操作？
10.《解除劳动合同通知书》如果表述不当，往往成为劳动者打赢官司的有力证据，企业该如何书写，才避免案件败诉而承担法律责任？
11.解除劳动合同前未通知及征求工会的意见，是否构成非法解除？
12.劳动合同到期后，经常出现该终止的忘记办理终止手续，该续签的忘记办理续签手续，其引发的风险非常大；那么企业该如何规避风险？
专题七：社会保险法
1.用人单位拖欠社保费，有什么法律责任？
2.用人单位不足额缴纳社会保险如何处理？
3.员工不愿意买社保，并与单位签有协议的情况下，该协议是否有效？
4.试用期间，是否必须缴纳社会保险？
5.如果无参保，劳动者因第三方责任产生的医疗费用，能否要求单位报销？
6.企业协助辞职员工骗取失业保险金，有什么法律风险？
7.女职工未婚先孕、未婚生育争议如何处理？
8.怀孕女职工提出长期休假保胎，直至修完产假，该如何协调此问题？
专题八：劳动争议处理
1.用人单位败诉的原因主要有哪些？
2.仲裁或法院在处理案件时，如何适用法律法规？
3.如何判定政策法律法规的效力等级？ 
4.公开审理的开庭形式，有何风险，如何避免风险？
5.申请仲裁的时效如何计算；如何理解“劳动争议发生之日”？
6.如何书写答辩书，有哪些注意事项？
7.开庭期间，质证与辩论需要注意哪些关键问题？
8.举证责任如何分配，无法举证的后果有哪些？
B单元内容（共2天，20个以上经典案例）
专题一：违纪违规问题员工处理
1.劳动者往往拒绝签收处分、解雇通知书，如何应对？
2.问题员工往往拒绝提交《检讨书》或否认违纪违规事实，企业该如何收集证据？
3.对于违纪员工，应该在什么时间内处理？
4.怎样理解“严重违反用人单位的规章制度”?
5.如何在《惩罚条例》中描述“一般违纪”、“较重违纪”及“严重违纪”？ 
6.怎样理解与操作“严重失职，营私舞弊，给用人单位造成重大损害”？
7.如何界定“重大损害”，“重大损害”是否必须体现为造成直接的经济损失？
8.如何追究“严重失职、严重违纪违规”者的法律责任？
9.能否直接规定“禁止兼职，否则视为严重违纪违规”？
10.直线部门经理擅自口头辞退员工，仲裁机构往往认定企业非法解雇，企业该如何做，才避免案件败诉？
11.劳动者不辞而别、无故旷工，却主张被企业口头解雇，往往得到仲裁机构的支持，企业该如何做，才避免案件败诉？
12.“录音录象”证据，仲裁与法院是否采信；企业内部OA系统上的资料能否作为证据使用；电子邮件、手机短信能否作为证据使用？
专题二：绩效管理与岗位调整
1.企业单方调整岗位，员工往往可被迫解除合同并索赔经济补偿，如何规避？
2.调岗时没有书面确认，员工到新岗位工作2个月后能否要求恢复到原岗位？
3.可否对“三期内”女职工进行调岗、调薪？
4.员工认同绩效结果，为什么在“不胜任工作”引发的争议中还是败诉？
5.为什么企业根据绩效结果支付员工绩效奖金，最终被认定非法克扣工资？
6.法律上如何证明劳动者“不能胜任工作”？
7.对绩效考核不合格的员工，如何合法辞退？
8.绩效正态分布往往强制划分5%的员工为不合格者，是否合法？
专题三：劳动报酬、薪酬福利
1.工资总额包括哪些工资明细？
2.新进员工薪资管理问题及处理技巧；
3.调整工作岗位后，如何单方调薪、降薪？
4.如何通过薪酬调整处理员工失职、违纪等问题？
5.值班算不算加班，如何防范风险？
6.加班加点工资支付常见误区？
7.用人单位如何设计工资构成以降低加班费成本？
8.未经用人单位安排，劳动者自行加班的，是否需支付加班工资？
9.劳动者主张入职以来的加班费，如何应对？
10.劳动者在工作日\法定节假日加班，能否安排补休而不予支付加班费？
11.病假、年休假、婚假、产假、丧假等的享受条件及工资待遇标准？
12.离职员工往往回头追讨年终奖，有可能得到支持，如何规避该风险？
专题四：经济补偿
1.用人单位需向劳动者支付经济补偿的情形有哪些？
2.什么情况下用人单位需支付两倍的经济补偿？
3.劳动者可否同时向用人单位主张经济补偿和赔偿金？
4.经济补偿计算的基数及标准如何确定？
5.经济补偿年限最高不超过十二年的适用范围？
6.如何计算《劳动合同法》生效前后的经济补偿年限？
7.如何理解“六个月以上不满一年的，按一年计算；不满六个月的，向劳动者支付半个月工资的经济补偿”？
8.劳动合同法环境下“50%额外经济补偿金”是否继续适用？
专题五：规章制度、员工手册
1.企业人力资源、劳动用工管理制度常见的误区有哪些？
2.人力资源、劳动用工管理制度应该包括哪些必备内容？
3.制定规章制度的程序要求给用人单位带来哪些风险，如何应对？
4.非国有用人单位如何组建“职工代表大会”？
5.无纸化、网络化办公下的公示，存在哪些风险？
6.如何公示或告知，更符合仲裁或诉讼的举证要求？
7.规章制度能否规定对员工进行经济处罚？ 
8.规章制度违反法律法规，劳动者可以被迫解除并索取经济补偿，如何防范？
9.规章制度与员工手册到底有什么区别？
10．规章制度与员工手册应该多长时间修改一次？
专题六：工伤保险条例
1.属于工伤范围的情形有哪些？
2.不得认定为工伤的情形有哪些？
3.怎样理解“上下班途中”，怎样控制期间的风险？
4.发生工伤事故，用人单位需承担哪些费用？
5.工伤员工借故拒绝复工，借故不断休假，如何处理？
6.对于第三方造成的工伤事故，劳动者能否要求用人单位支付工伤待遇又同时要求第三方支付人身伤害赔偿？ 
7.用人单位能否以商业保险理赔款替代职工工伤赔偿待遇？
8.发生工伤事故，双方私下和解，补偿协议该如何签订才有效？
专题七：劳务派遣
1.新法下劳务派遣面临的主要风险有哪些？
2.劳务派遣合作协议必须注意的风险细节有哪些？
3.派遣工“第三签”时，能否要求签订无固定期限劳动合同？
4.哪些岗位可以使用派遣工，辅助性、临时性、替代性如何理解与操作？
5.新规定对于同工同酬提出哪些新要求，如何规避同工同酬风险？
6.采用劳务派遣用工方式，能否异地参保？
7.用工单位如何行使对派遣员工的退还或退换权？
8.怎样规定派遣员工的辞职程序和离职责任？
9.部分劳务公司很可能面临关闭停业，原来的派遣工的劳动关系如何处理？
10.业务外包与劳务派遣的本质区别有哪些？
11.用工单位如何应对派遣合作争议和劳动争议？
【授_课_专_家_介_绍】资_深_劳_动_法_专_家　钟永棣 
　　 

Re: Enabling peer to peer device transactions for PCIe devices

[Logan Gunthorpe]

On 23/10/17 10:08 AM, David Laight wrote:

It is also worth checking that the hardware actually supports p2p transfers.
Writes are more likely to be supported then reads.
ISTR that some intel cpus support some p2p writes, but there could easily
be errata against them.


Ludwig mentioned a PCIe switch. The few switches I'm aware of support 
P2P transfers. So if everything is setup correctly, the TLPs shouldn't 
even touch the CPU.


But, yes, generally it's a good idea to start with writes and see if 
they work first.


Logan
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] dm log writes: add support for DAX

[Ross Zwisler]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 01:34:09PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:24:04PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > Now that we have the ability log filesystem writes using a flat buffer, add
> > support for DAX.  Unfortunately we can't easily track data that has been
> > written via mmap() now that the dax_flush() abstraction was removed by this
> > commit:
> > 
> > commit c3ca015fab6d ("dax: remove the pmem_dax_ops->flush abstraction")
> > 
> > Otherwise we could just treat each flush as a big write, and store the data
> > that is being synced to media.  It may be worthwhile to add the dax_flush()
> > entry point back, just as a notifier so we can do this logging.
> > 
> > The motivation for this support is the need for an xfstest that can test
> > the new MAP_SYNC DAX flag.  By logging the filesystem activity with
> > dm-log-writes we can show that the MAP_SYNC page faults are writing out
> > their metadata as they happen, instead of requiring an explicit
> > msync/fsync.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler 
> > ---
> 
> Ok this is just my ignorance of how DAX works shining through, but do we need 
> a
> new flag to indicate this is DAX data?  You are logging it like it's just 
> normal
> data going to a certain sector, is that good enough?  If it is then hooray 
> this
> looks fine to me, I'm just slightly confused.  Thanks,
> 
> Josef

I don't think we need a special flag to specify that it's DAX.  Really it's
just the same as a normal filesystem write, except that we actually do the
work of writing the data via the FS DAX iomap code instead of bubbling it all
the way down to the block driver.
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] dm log writes: add support for DAX

[Josef Bacik]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:24:04PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> Now that we have the ability log filesystem writes using a flat buffer, add
> support for DAX.  Unfortunately we can't easily track data that has been
> written via mmap() now that the dax_flush() abstraction was removed by this
> commit:
> 
> commit c3ca015fab6d ("dax: remove the pmem_dax_ops->flush abstraction")
> 
> Otherwise we could just treat each flush as a big write, and store the data
> that is being synced to media.  It may be worthwhile to add the dax_flush()
> entry point back, just as a notifier so we can do this logging.
> 
> The motivation for this support is the need for an xfstest that can test
> the new MAP_SYNC DAX flag.  By logging the filesystem activity with
> dm-log-writes we can show that the MAP_SYNC page faults are writing out
> their metadata as they happen, instead of requiring an explicit
> msync/fsync.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler 
> ---

Ok this is just my ignorance of how DAX works shining through, but do we need a
new flag to indicate this is DAX data?  You are logging it like it's just normal
data going to a certain sector, is that good enough?  If it is then hooray this
looks fine to me, I'm just slightly confused.  Thanks,

Josef
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

RE: Enabling peer to peer device transactions for PCIe devices

[David Laight]

From: Petrosyan Ludwig
> Sent: 22 October 2017 07:14
> Could be I have done is stupid...
> But at first sight it has to be simple:
> The PCIe Write transactions are address routed, so if in the packet header 
> the other endpoint address
> is written the TLP has to be routed (by PCIe Switch to the endpoint), the DMA 
> reading from the end
> point is really write transactions from the endpoint, usually (Xilinx core) 
> to start DMA one has to
> write to the DMA control register of the endpoint the destination address. So 
> I have change the device
> driver to set in this register the physical address of the other endpoint 
> (get_resource start called
> to other endpoint, and it is the same address which I could see in lspci 
> - -s bus-address of the
> switch port, memories behind bridge), so now the endpoint has to start send 
> writes TLP with the other
> endpoint address in the TLP header.
> But this is not working (I want to understand why ...), but I could see the 
> first address of the
> destination endpoint is changed (with the wrong value 0xFF),
> now I want to try prepare in the driver of one endpoint the DMA buffer , but 
> using physical address of
> the other endpoint,
> Could be it will never work, but I want to understand why, there is my error 
> ...

It is also worth checking that the hardware actually supports p2p transfers.
Writes are more likely to be supported then reads.
ISTR that some intel cpus support some p2p writes, but there could easily
be errata against them.

I'd certainly test a single word write to read/write memory location.
First verify against kernel memory, then against a 'slave' board.

I don't know about Xilinx fpga, but we've had 'fun' getting Altera fpga
to do sensible PCIe cycles (I ended up writing a simple dma controller 
that would generate long TLP).
We also found a bug in the Altera logic that processed interleaved
read completions.

David

___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] dax: require 'struct page' for filesystem dax

[Dan Williams]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:44 AM, Martin Schwidefsky
 wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 01:55:20 -0700
> Dan Williams  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Martin Schwidefsky
>>  wrote:
>> > On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 18:29:33 +0200
>> > Christoph Hellwig  wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 08:23:02AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> >> > Yes, however it seems these drivers / platforms have been living with
>> >> > the lack of struct page for a long time. So they either don't use DAX,
>> >> > or they have a constrained use case that never triggers
>> >> > get_user_pages(). If it is the latter then they could introduce a new
>> >> > configuration option that bypasses the pfn_t_devmap() check in
>> >> > bdev_dax_supported() and fix up the get_user_pages() paths to fail.
>> >> > So, I'd like to understand how these drivers have been using DAX
>> >> > support without struct page to see if we need a workaround or we can
>> >> > go ahead delete this support. If the usage is limited to
>> >> > execute-in-place perhaps we can do a constrained ->direct_access() for
>> >> > just that case.
>> >>
>> >> For axonram I doubt anyone is using it any more - it was a very for
>> >> the IBM Cell blades, which were produceѕ in a rather limited number.
>> >> And Cell basically seems to be dead as far as I can tell.
>> >>
>> >> For S/390 Martin might be able to help out what the status of xpram
>> >> in general and DAX support in particular is.
>> >
>> > The goes back to the time where DAX was called XIP. The initial design
>> > point has been *not* to have struct pages for a large read-only memory
>> > area. There is a block device driver for z/VM that maps a DCSS segment
>> > somewhere in memore (no struct page!) with e.g. the complete /usr
>> > filesystem. The xpram driver is a different beast and has nothing to
>> > do with XIP/DAX.
>> >
>> > Now, if any there are very few users of the dcssblk driver out there.
>> > The idea to save a few megabyte for /usr never really took of.
>> >
>> > We have to look at our get_user_pages() implementation to see how hard
>> > it would be to make it fail if the target address is for an area without
>> > struct pages.
>>
>> For read-only memory I think we can enable a subset of DAX, and
>> explicitly turn off the paths that require get_user_pages(). However,
>> I wonder if anyone has tested DAX with dcssblk because fork() requires
>> get_user_pages()?
>
> I did not test it recently, someone else might have. Gerald?
>
> Looking at the code I see this in the s390 version of gup_pte_range:
>
> mask = (write ? _PAGE_PROTECT : 0) | _PAGE_INVALID | _PAGE_SPECIAL;
> ...
> if ((pte_val(pte) & mask) != 0)
> return 0;
> ...
>
> The XIP code used the pte_mkspecial mechanics to make it work. As far as
> I can see the pfn_t_devmap returns true for the DAX mappins, yes?

Yes, but that's only for get_user_pages_fast() support.

> Then I would say that dcssblk and DAX currently do not work together.

I think at a minimum we need a new pfn_t flag for the 'special' bit to
at least indicate that DAX mappings of dcssblk and axonram do not
support normal get_user_pages(). Then I don't need to explicitly
disable DAX in the !pfn_t_devmap() case. I think I also want to split
the "pfn_to_virt()" and the "sector to pfn" operations into distinct
dax_operations rather than doing both in one ->direct_access(). This
supports storing pfns in the fs/dax radix rather than sectors.

In other words, the pfn_t_devmap() requirement was only about making
get_user_pages() safely fail, and pte_special() fills that
requirement.
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] dax: require 'struct page' for filesystem dax

[Dan Williams]

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Martin Schwidefsky
 wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 18:29:33 +0200
> Christoph Hellwig  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 08:23:02AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> > Yes, however it seems these drivers / platforms have been living with
>> > the lack of struct page for a long time. So they either don't use DAX,
>> > or they have a constrained use case that never triggers
>> > get_user_pages(). If it is the latter then they could introduce a new
>> > configuration option that bypasses the pfn_t_devmap() check in
>> > bdev_dax_supported() and fix up the get_user_pages() paths to fail.
>> > So, I'd like to understand how these drivers have been using DAX
>> > support without struct page to see if we need a workaround or we can
>> > go ahead delete this support. If the usage is limited to
>> > execute-in-place perhaps we can do a constrained ->direct_access() for
>> > just that case.
>>
>> For axonram I doubt anyone is using it any more - it was a very for
>> the IBM Cell blades, which were produceѕ in a rather limited number.
>> And Cell basically seems to be dead as far as I can tell.
>>
>> For S/390 Martin might be able to help out what the status of xpram
>> in general and DAX support in particular is.
>
> The goes back to the time where DAX was called XIP. The initial design
> point has been *not* to have struct pages for a large read-only memory
> area. There is a block device driver for z/VM that maps a DCSS segment
> somewhere in memore (no struct page!) with e.g. the complete /usr
> filesystem. The xpram driver is a different beast and has nothing to
> do with XIP/DAX.
>
> Now, if any there are very few users of the dcssblk driver out there.
> The idea to save a few megabyte for /usr never really took of.
>
> We have to look at our get_user_pages() implementation to see how hard
> it would be to make it fail if the target address is for an area without
> struct pages.

For read-only memory I think we can enable a subset of DAX, and
explicitly turn off the paths that require get_user_pages(). However,
I wonder if anyone has tested DAX with dcssblk because fork() requires
get_user_pages()?
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm