美國白領勞工工作時間法律問題之研究－兼論對我國勞動基準法第八十四條之一之啟示

A Study on the Legal Issues Concerning the Working Hours of White-Collar Workers in the United States -and its Implications for Article 84-1 in the Labor Standards Act of Taiwan

李佑均(Yu-Chun Lee)

指導教授 ： 王能君

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/科際整合法律學研究所/碩士(2016年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201602187

摘要

隨著當代服務業之興起，白領勞工之工時遂成為一新興議題，在這當中應如何兼顧對勞工之保護與雇主之營運彈性？為了回應此一問題意識，本論文擬透過對美國法之研究，期望對我國白領勞工工時之規範提供啟示與反思。
本論文於第一章先介紹了研究動機與架構，於第二章則說明美國法下白領除外規定(White-collar exemption)之內涵。該規定之主要精神在於排除《公平勞動基準法》下法定加班費之適用，並進一步提供了白領勞工判斷上之要件：勞工必須依序通過薪資基準檢驗(salary basis test)、薪資水平檢驗(salary level test)以及職務檢驗(duty test)，始具備白領身分。在確認勞工具備白領身分之後，本論文於第三章進一步探討其工時規範型態。在對美國法白領勞工工時規範進行上述說明後，本論文遂於第四章以我國勞基法第八十四條之一第一項第一款之「監督、管理人員或責任制專業人員」作為研究對象，探討該款人員之認定標準以及工時條件。
最後，於第五章透過我國與美國之比較，本論文整理出結論如下：就白領勞工之認定標準與工時條件而言，美國僅於前者有國家高度管制，對後者則是採取私法自治模式，此乃雇用自由意志原則(employment-at-will)原則之展現；我國則不論是對於前者或後者，皆有國家力量之高度介入。本論文藉此進一步歸結出二國白領勞工工時規範上之優劣：美國之模式固然具備因應白領勞工工作型態之彈性，然而在當代未必能確保妥適之勞資利益分配型態；我國之模式則固然對勞工較為保護，然而卻始終難以擺脫法定工時之色彩而彈性不足。因此，國家如何能制定一個具保護色彩之框架性規範，使勞資雙方可在其中以私法自治形成更具彈性之勞動條件，遂成為未來值得進一步研究之方向。

關鍵字

白領勞工 ； 工作時間 ； 白領除外規定 ； 勞動基準法第八十四條之一 ； 監督管理人員 ； 責任制 ； 加班

並列摘要

At the rise of the service industry, the working hours of white-collar workers has become an emergent issue. Considering this, the most important issue is how to strike a balance between operational elasticity for employers and the protection of labor rights. To respond to this problem, this thesis aims to provide some inspirations and reflections for the legal system regulating the working hours of white-collar workers in Taiwan, by conducting research on the corresponding legal system in the United States.
Chapter 1 introduces the motivation and structure of this thesis. Chapter 2 provides an elaboration on the “White-collar exemption” clause in the United States, of which the main purpose is to exclude the overtime pay regulated by the Fair Labor Standards Act. In addition, the exemption provides criteria for deciding the characterization of the white-collar. In order to be qualified as a white-collar, a labor must pass three tests sequentially: the salary basis test, the salary level test and the duty test. Based on the white-collar identity, Chapter 3 furthermore studies its working hour issues. After the above research on the regulation in the United States, Chapter 4 focuses on the “Supervisory, administrative workers, and professional workers with designated responsibility” in Article 84-1 in the Labor Standards Act of Taiwan, discussing the criteria and working hour standards for workers in this category.
Finally, conclusion is derived through a comparison between Taiwan and the United States in Chapter 5: As for the criteria and work hour of the white-collar, the United States exercises high degree of intervention from the public power for the former, while the latter mostly relies upon private autonomy. On the other hand, Taiwan administers high degree of intervention from the public power on both of the above-mentioned aspects. Based on this difference, the pros and cons of the work-hour systems of the two countries can be generated. The system in the United States has enough flexibility to adjust the working condition for the white-collar workers, while having more difficulty to ensure appropriate interest distribution between employers and laborers nowadays. The system in Taiwan gives laborers more protection, while being confined in the legal framework of working hours restrictions, which results in a lack of flexibility. In view of this, how do the public power design a framework of regulation, in which enough protection and flexibility can be provided to help laborers shape working hours conditions through private autonomy? This can be an issue worth studying in the future.

並列關鍵字

White-collar ； Working hours ； White-collar exemption ； Article 84-1 in the Labor Standards Act ； Supervisor and administrative workers ； Professional workers with designated responsibility ； Overtime

參考文獻

王能君（2012）。〈勞動基準法上加班法律規範與問題之研究—日本與台灣之加班法制與實務〉，《臺北大學法學論叢》，第81期，頁75-138。

吳姿慧（2012）。〈勞動基準法第84條之1適用現況之檢討—以保全服務業為例〉，《東海大學法學研究》，第38期，頁181-242。

郭玲惠（2004）。〈勞動基準法工時制度之沿革與實務爭議問題之初探〉，《律師雜誌》，第298期，頁15-30。

焦興鎧（1995）。《勞工法與勞工權利之保障—美國勞工法論文集（一）》。台北：元照。

侯岳宏（2013）。〈未依法定計算方法給付加班費之效力〉，《臺北大學法學論 叢》，第88期，頁261-291。