(SINGAPORE 2026.57) A wave of widely reported sudden deaths among Chinese tech workers in late 2025 and early 2026—most notably the case of 32-year-old Guangzhou programmer Gao Guanghui (高广辉)—has reignited national debate over China’s entrenched culture of overwork.
Gao’s case is now seen as a potential turning point after authorities reportedly ruled that his death late last year was work-related. The decision has drawn renewed attention to earlier incidents that were previously dismissed as not connected to work conditions. It may also signal a shift in how such deaths are legally interpreted and recognized in China going forward.
On a Saturday in November 2025, Gao suddenly collapsed inside the elevator of his apartment building in front of his wife, Yang Huasi (杨华思). The official cause of his death was cardiac and respiratory arrest.
What made the case especially harrowing was that, while Gao was being resuscitated, his phone continued to receive messages from clients urging him to update project progress. Yang told reporters that her husband regularly worked extreme hours. On weekdays, he was often awake at home for less than two hours a day. In the period leading up to his death, she said, he had been completely exhausted, and even his personal WeChat account had effectively been taken over by work communications.
This year, Yang received an official ruling from the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau of Guangzhou’s Huangpu District recognizing Gao’s death as work-related. The document stated that, after considering factors such as his working hours and job position, and reviewing all available evidence, the circumstances met the criteria under Article 15(1) of China’s Work-Related Injury Insurance Regulations, and the death was therefore classified as work-related.
However, there has so far been no public information on how Gao’s family will be compensated.
A human resources and social security bureau is a local branch of China’s Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security responsible for labor policy, pensions, and work injury adjudication
Article 15 of China’s Work-Related Injury Insurance Regulations provides that employees who suddenly die from illness during working hours and at the workplace—or who die within 48 hours after emergency resuscitation fails—may be treated as having died from a work-related cause, noted IT Times (IT时报), a Shanghai-based publication.
In practice, however, defining “working hours,” “the workplace,” and the “48-hour rule” has been a complex task, often leading to delays and disputed rulings. Courts have also frequently issued inconsistent interpretations, IT Times pointed out.
Some rulings have taken a broad view, holding that “working hours” may include necessary short breaks taken during work for recovery, treating them as a continuation of working time rather than off-duty periods.
Other decisions have taken the opposite approach. In one case, an employee who died of a heart attack while eating breakfast in a dormitory was denied work-related recognition, with the court ruling that the dormitory was a place for personal life and rest rather than an extension of the workplace.
In another case involving 26-year-old architectural designer Feng Yulang (冯宇浪), disputes arose over the definition of “workplace.” The Human Resources and Social Security Bureau in Yulin, Shaanxi province, ruled that Feng was not “at his post” at the time of death.
According to his wife, Feng had been working late for most of the month, including handling tasks after midnight. However, the bureau cited company records showing that he had been playing online games between 1 a.m. and 3 a.m. on that fateful night. While he remained in the office, officials concluded that he was engaged in personal entertainment and had rested on a folding bed, and therefore not performing work at the time.
His wife disputed this interpretation, arguing that gaming was simply a way for him to rest and recover so he could continue working, and noted that several design software programs remained open on his computer showing he had been at work. The case went to trial on April 10, 2026, and a final ruling has not yet been announced.
On December 27, 2025, 37-year-old Zhang Liang (张亮), an engineer at Beijing Fanghong Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. (北京方鸿智能科技有限公司), met friends for a simple meal before returning to work. As he stood up to leave, he suddenly felt unwell, collapsed, and later died despite emergency treatment.
According to his wife, Cai Xiaodan (蔡晓丹), Zhang’s workload had intensified significantly after his company secured a major project. He routinely worked late into the night—often until after midnight —and had little rest, with weekends and holidays frequently consumed by work. In the days before his death, he had returned from a demanding business trip involving physically straining field testing.
Before the last Lunar New Year, Cai signed an agreement with Zhang’s employer under which the company promised to assist in applying for a work-related death determination, provide attendance and payroll records, and supply insurance documents. However, in March, the company informed her that its parent group did not agree the death qualified as work-related and advised her to submit the claim independently. It also stated that the company had never arranged overtime for Zhang.
Lawyer Chen Danfeng (陈丹峰) of Shanghai Zhengce Law Firm said there were factors in favour of Zhang’s family, including the fact that Zhang had been actively working that morning and continued receiving work-related messages even after his collapse. He noted that courts have increasingly accepted electronic records such as chat logs and email timestamps as evidence of overtime work.
Also, under China’s Work-Related Injury Insurance Regulations, when an employer disputes a claim, the burden of proof shifts to the company, meaning families only need to provide preliminary evidence and the employer has to disprove their claims.
Still, Zhang’s case faces challenges because his collapse occurred outside the workplace after a meal, making it hard to establish that the time and space of the moment are connected to work.
At the heart of these disputes is a broader paradox: deaths linked to overwork typically result from prolonged exhaustion accumulated over time, yet China’s current system often focuses narrowly on the worker’s final moment before collapse.
As IT Times observed, China lacks clear, measurable standards for defining death from overwork.
By contrast, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare revised its criteria in 2001, setting thresholds linked to cardiovascular risk: more than 100 hours of overtime in the month before illness onset, or an average exceeding 80 overtime hours per month over the previous two to six months. These benchmarks became informally known as Japan’s “karoshi line,” (过劳死线）referring to death from overwork.
Another proposed reform is to move beyond rigid definitions of “work mode” and better reflect modern labor realities such as remote work, flexible schedules, and invisible overtime.
In November 2025, China’s Ministry of Human Resources and Social Securit issued new guidance stating that overtime, at home or otherwise, should be considered working hours. It also clarified that injuries that occur while working from home should not be excluded solely because the employee is outside the office, and that illnesses arising during home-based overtime that clearly encroach on rest time may also qualify as work-related.
Lawyer Chen described these as important steps toward redefining “work mode,” suggesting that future judicial practice may increasingly combine excessive overtime hours with broader recognition of actual working conditions.
In recent years, courts in cities such as Guangzhou and Changsha have begun to adopt more flexible interpretations of the workplace, recognizing some after-hours illnesses and home-based overtime as related to work. Courts in Nantong have even held that employers may bear civil liability for illegal excessive overtime, even when a death is not formally classified as work-related.
These emerging precedents may prove significant for cases such as those of Zhang Liang and Feng Yulang, IT Times concluded.
