Like this one thing the original cause of the words, or need to first understand clearly, to avoid uninformed people confused.
Roughly the course of events is this:Haikou Municipal Market Supervision Administration published the administrative penalty decision shows that on May 13, 2020, Haikou Municipal Market Supervision Administration Comprehensive Free Trade Zone Branch of the law enforcement officers, according to the law of a Hainan Decoration Company Limited cafeteria routine inspection found that the company is unauthorized to open up a cafeteria by the company's legal representative of family Nanny part-time chef, canteen daily dining number of 7-15 people, to the case in May 2020, did not apply for the "food business license", because of unauthorized food service activities, law enforcement officers in accordance with China's "Food Safety Law" Article 122 provides: ? Failure to obtain a food production and operation license to engage in production and operation activities, a fine of 50,000 yuan or more than 100,000 yuan? , ordered the company to immediately stop the illegal behavior, and a fine of 50,000 yuan.
It is understood that, in the face of law enforcement officers to investigate, the company involved in the staff argued that it is free to employees to supply lunch, and the number of people each meal is only 7-15 people, but law enforcement officers found that this is not the case.
? Our on-site inspection when the cafeteria is splitting the meal, alone from the splitting of the meal, when the meal at least 30 people dining, and there is a record of charges. Lin Fangyang to the reporter to provide the case scene photos show that the table can accommodate more than 40 people at the same time at the same time meals, meals on the table to share the number of copies in about 30. Inside the company staff to report the number of meals on the statistical table there? Checkout subtotal? The company's main goal is to provide the best possible service to its customers.
? The content of the administrative penalty decision letter is just a factual record of the other side of the unilateral statement, we do not have the law enforcement details published one by one, I did not expect to be misinterpreted by the netizens. Zhu Linsheng said, after the law enforcement officers criticized and educated, the person in charge of the company recognized the error and came forward to accept the investigation, on September 23, 2020 to pay a fine of 50,000 yuan.
So, in fact, see here, roughly all understand, this for employees to provide free lunch was fined, in fact, is not provided free of charge, but privately operated cafeteria, there are relevant records show that it did not obtain ? Food business license? The case of revenue, and health and staff convenience does not meet the requirements of the regulations, and therefore was sentenced to a fine of 50,000 is also justifiable, so it is not as most people speak, free lunch was fined.
Mainly the person in charge of the company did not comply with the relevant food business regulations, so it will make such a misunderstanding, understand the original cause of the matter, is also able to express understanding, after all, like the stage of food safety problems now frequent, the relevant departments of the strengthening of the regulatory efforts, the need to be more responsible for the health and safety of the people's food, so this is the point, the relevant departments are not to do wrong, but also reasonable and lawful!
.