法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 論罷工糾察界限與糾察手段之合法性(Restrictions on Picket Lines and the Legality of Strike Actions)
編著譯者: 邱羽凡
出版日期: 2019.12
刊登出處: 台灣/中原財經法學第 43 期 /87-154 頁
頁  數: 68 點閱次數: 782
下載點數: 272 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 邱羽凡
關 鍵 詞: 爭議行為罷工罷工糾察罷工附隨行為權利濫用禁止原則比例原則公共利益
中文摘要: 2011 年勞動三法修訂後,勞資爭議處理法將罷工糾察明文化,承認罷工糾察在爭議行為法制中之地位,惟同時立法者並未對罷工糾察之定義與合法性界限有所著墨,造成實務上爭議頻傳。本文分析我國學說與實務上之討論,並輔以德國法作為參考,提出罷工糾察乃係罷工之附隨爭議手段,惟其任務應包含單純拒絕提供勞務外所為確保或強化罷工之有效性所進行的一切行為,包括但不限於勸諭勞工支持罷工之行為。在合法性判斷上,勞資爭議處理法第 55 條第 1 項於罷工糾察的適用上,應注意罷工權係專以損害爭議相對人為目的的權利,而基於調和私人利益間的相互衝突,並讓爭議權行使的法律秩序更加合理化,以求得公平正義之目的,故在評價罷工糾察行為時,應分就「罷工糾察所代表的利益」與「他人之利益以及公共利益」此兩方面為整體的衡量,以審酌所涉糾察行為的合法性。
英文關鍵詞: industrial actionstrikepicketingderivative campaigns of strikesabuse of rightsprinciple of proportionalitypublic interest
英文摘要: Of the three labor statutes that were amended in 2011, the “Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes” (ASLMD) legitimizes and legalizes picketing in Taiwan. However, the definition and legal boundary of picketing under this act and relevant laws remain vague, leading to controversies in practice. Therefore, by rendering legal scholarship and opinions of practitioners (including German law), the article concludes that picketing is coupled with strikes, rather than a separate union action. Moreover, apart from preventing the provision of labor service, picketing ensures and strengthens strike effectiveness. Regarding the legality of picketing, Article 55(1) of theASLMD states that “industrial actions shall be undertaken in good faith and on the basis of the principle of the vested rights that shall not be abused”. In other words, if the article is applied in the context of strike picketing, the right to strike is the right to impair the rights of employers. Specifically, when picketing, employers might incur loss of profits and reputation. Moreover, cadres of labor unions might persuade other workers to join the strike, block substitutes, or impair the rights of employers and third parties, all of which might cause damages. Nevertheless, to promote the fairness of picketing, reconciling conflict of interests between parties is crucial. Thus, to evaluate the legality of picketing under Article 55(1) of the ASLMD, we should consider “picketer’s interest” and “employer’s interest, as well as public interest”.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、罷工糾察之定義
一、迄今之討論
二、罷工糾察定義之檢討
三、小結
參、勞資爭議處理法第 55 條第 1 項與糾察手段之合法性分析
一、勞動三法修訂與罷工手段合法性之規範
二、勞資爭議處理法第 55 條第 1 項於罷工糾察行為上之適用
肆、罷工糾察行為之類型與合法性
一、罷工宣傳行為
二、勸說勞工加入罷工
三、封鎖事業單位出入口
伍、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
返回功能列