Professional profile
About Yu
Workplace Sexual Harassment Matters in Shenzhen
Yu Tan advises employees and employers in Shenzhen on sexual harassment complaints, workplace investigations, employment consequences and related civil claims, with careful attention to evidence, confidentiality and non-retaliation duties.
Ms. Tan practices at Guangdong Zhicheng Law Firm, often with Nanshan technology and corporate employers in view. She studied at Wuhan University Law School, was admitted in 2012, and has about eleven years of experience. She works in English, Mandarin and Cantonese and is a member of the Shenzhen Lawyers Association.
Harassment files are high-stakes for people and for companies. Mishandled investigations create defamation, privacy and unfair-dismissal exposure on top of the original complaint. Ms. Tan designs processes that are fair enough to defend later: clear mandates, trauma-aware interview planning, document holds and decision memos that track evidence rather than office politics.
Investigations, Interim Measures and Exit Decisions
For employers, she advises on interim separation of parties, message preservation, and when to involve external investigators. For employees, she helps preserve evidence lawfully, assess internal complaint routes versus labour arbitration or civil claims, and avoid steps that undermine credibility. Cross-border employers need alignment with global codes of conduct without violating Chinese labour and privacy constraints on data handling during investigations.
Settlement agreements—if appropriate—should address references, non-disparagement realism, outstanding pay, and future contact rules. Silence clauses that try to block lawful reporting to authorities are handled with care.
- Complaint intake and investigation protocol design
- Evidence strategy for employees and employer defences
- Disciplinary and termination decisions post-investigation
- Related labour arbitration and civil claim interfaces
Confidential Contact
These matters require discretion. Use this profile’s contact form with a high-level summary first; detailed evidence can follow under engagement. State whether you are an individual or HR/legal for an employer, and whether any deadline (arbitration limitation, scheduled hearing, or media risk) is already running. Scope and fees are confirmed in writing before substantive interviews are scheduled.
Technology Workplaces, Power Imbalances and Documentation
Nanshan and wider Shenzhen technology employers often have flat cultures that still contain sharp power imbalances between founders, managers and junior staff. Ms. Tan designs reporting channels that do not force a complainant to report only to the alleged harasser’s line. She trains HR on interim measures that protect safety without pre-judging outcomes.
Digital evidence—messages, images, access logs—must be preserved lawfully. She advises against illegal recordings where they create separate risk, and she helps clients use lawful collection and notarisation options. For employers, search of company devices should follow policy and proportionality; fishing expeditions damage both investigation integrity and employee-relations posture.
Retaliation claims often eclipse the original harassment dispute. Performance reviews and project removals after a complaint are examined closely. She documents legitimate business reasons contemporaneously when adverse actions are truly unrelated—and she blocks actions that will not survive scrutiny.
Where parties share social circles or industry communities, confidentiality about process (not about lawful reporting) helps prevent parallel defamation wars. She sets communication rules for both sides during investigation windows.
Arbitration, Civil Claims and Reputation Management
Some harassment matters proceed primarily through labour arbitration as wrongful dismissal or constructive dismissal theories after a complainant is pushed out. Others proceed as civil claims seeking apology, damages and injunctive-style relief against contact. Ms. Tan helps clients choose forums based on remedy needs, evidence strength and speed, rather than filing everywhere at once.
Employers often ask whether a single written warning is enough. She ties disciplinary ladders to investigation findings and prior policy training. Inconsistent treatment across similar cases is a litigation gift; she audits comparable files where available. Training records, handbook acknowledgements and prior complaints about the same respondent become central exhibits.
When external counsel for the respondent and complainant both engage, she sets communication protocols to reduce direct party conflict during investigation. Parallel criminal complaints are rare but serious; if they appear, she coordinates so that employment process does not obstruct lawful investigation while still protecting civil fairness.
International assignees in Shenzhen may want home-country hotlines involved. She explains what can be shared across borders under personal-information rules and employment necessity, preventing well-meaning HQ processes from creating unlawful transfers or dual, conflicting findings.
Closing letters to parties should state findings at an appropriate level of detail, outline remedial steps and remind participants of non-retaliation rules. Over-detailed circulation lists turn confidential processes into office folklore; under-detailed letters look like whitewash. Ms. Tan drafts for that balance and for later tribunal readability.
Capability
