她們想/需要什麼樣的法律？ ─性別工作平等法典型歷史敘事的反思

What Kind of Law Did Women Want/Need? Rethinking the Standard Historical Narratives of the Act of Gender Equality in Employment

蔡牧融(Mu-Jung Tsai)

指導教授 ： 陳昭如

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.02648

摘要

性別工作平等法是規範性別勞動平等最主要的法律，2009年夏天爆發的台中國美館女服務員抗爭事件，突顯了勞動派遣讓性別工作平等法形同具文的問題，勾起我想要瞭解性別工作平等法立法歷程的好奇心。過程中，我發現婦女新知建構的典型歷史敘事是人們認知這段歷史的主要知識來源，也是既有研究普遍依循的論述框架，著眼於婦女新知挑戰國家機器與資本市場的深入分析。
我認為典型歷史敘事有三個需要進一步釐清的問題。首先，戰後單身、禁孕條款議題發展被以「壓迫傳統」簡短帶過，不但忽略了曾經存在的抵抗，也造成女性主義法律改革的歷史斷裂。其次，1987年8月國父紀念館、高雄市立中正文化中心女服務員抗爭事件的描述，缺乏以女服務員為行動主體的面貌，也掩蓋了形成不同法律改革想像的可能。最後，婦女新知挑戰國家機器和資本市場的歷史圖像，既未能呈現其他行動者對於法律改革藍圖的不同想像，也無法清楚解釋何以歷史的發展會走向制定性別工作平等法。
我透過女性主義法律史的研究方法，來重新說一個故事。1950年代興起戰後台灣第一波反單身、禁孕條款浪潮浪潮(1950s-1960s)，隨著抗爭對象由公營金融機構轉向民營金融機構，在第二波反單身、禁孕條款浪潮(1960s-1987)中出現了國家公權力能否介入私法關係的法理爭議，促成了以形式平等為核心的法律改革訴求提出。1987年8月爆發國父紀念館、高雄市立中正文化中心女服務員抗爭事件，女服務員的訴求從一開始要求廢止單身、禁孕條款，轉而要求納入正式編制人員，以享有基本勞動條件的保障。不過，婦女新知選擇著眼於單身、禁孕條款議題，並決定由民間來推動立法，除延續禁止差別待遇的形式平等主張，還融入挑戰公私領域劃分下性別角色分工的實質平等精神，同時成功帶動其他行動者投入法律改革行動。歷經1980年代末期的論辯，於制度設計上不再以女性為唯一的家庭照顧者，而是希望男性受僱者也加入育兒的行列。邁入1990年代之後，由於國家與雇主不願共同負擔育兒責任，導致立法進度遭到延宕。不過，這段時期不但工運團體參與了性別勞動平等的法律改革，選擇從修改勞動基準法著手，職場性騷擾之防治也開始受到關注，更讓差別待遇之禁止融入實質平等的色彩，有利差別待遇或性別比例等概念相繼被提出。隨著立法推動的困境於1990年代末期有所突破，過去存在的多元法律改革聲音，有部分延續下來，有部分遭到遺忘，最終是在婦女新知與行政院各自提出的版本間尋求共識，才讓性別工作平等法於立法院三讀通過。
性別工作平等法典型歷史敘事的反思，希望讓更多人對於戰後台灣單身、禁孕條款議題與性別勞動平等法律改革的關聯，有更為完整的認識，同時在具備歷史思維的基礎之上，共同思考未來的法律改革之路可以如何繼續往前邁進。

關鍵字

女性主義法律史 ； 性別工作平等法 ； 典型歷史敘事 ； 差別待遇之禁止 ； 職場性騷擾之防治 ； 促進工作平等措施

並列摘要

The Act of Gender Equality in Employment is the most important law in stipulating the gender equality in employment. Female attendents of National Taiwan Museum of Fine Art protested against employment discrimination in 2009 raised public awarness, and brought attention to the limitation in implementing the Act of Gender Equality in Employment in cases of dispatched employment. This induced my curiosity to the legislative evolution of the Act of Gender Equality in Employment. I find that the historical narrative constructed by Awakening Foundation serves as the major resource of understanding this history, and many researchers have adopted this framework to analyze how Awakening Foundation challenged the state apparatus and marketing organism.
Yet, in my research, I identified three problems of the standards historical narratives. First, the development of fighting against marriage discrimination and pregnancy discrimination in Post-war Taiwan is regarded as the oppression of the tradition, leading to the disruption in feminism legal reform movement. Second, the description of Sun-Yet-Sen Memorial Hall and Kaoshiung Chiang Kai-Shek Cultural Center female attendents protest in August 1987 lacks the subjective voice of female attendents, it also therefore neglected the possibility of a different legal reform. Third, the historical picture of Awakening Foundation challenging the state apparatus and marketing organism cannot demonstrate the diversity of the actors’ understanding and actions on the relationship among gender, power and law.
I adopt feminist legal history as my tool to rewrite this history . In this version, the first wave of anti-marriage and pregnancy discrimination movement (1950-1960) was against the state-run financial instutions. The second wave of the movement (1960-1987) concerned the jurisprudence dispute of whether state power should interfere with private legal relations, especially one between female workers and private financial instutions. This contributed to the proposal of a legal reform advocacy focused on formal equality. Female attendants’ protest in 1987 August in Sun-Yet-Sen Memorial Hall and Kaoshiung Chiang Kai-Shek Cultural Centre demanded the government and the management to eliminate the marriage and pregnancy discriminations in their working rules. However, the demand developed into one requesting them being transferred to regular employees, so to enjoy the protection of the Labor Standard Act. In the meantime, Awakening Foundation chose the issue of marriage and pregnancy discrimination, and decided to promote the lawmaking by itself. Their proposal satisfied substantive equality by challenging the division of the public and the private. Also, they successfully drove the other actors to participate in the legal reform. After the debate in the late 1980s, the institutional design does regard women as the sole family caregivers-- men could be responsible for childcare as well. In 1990s, this legal reform movement entered Legislative Yuan and yet encountered strong opposition from the state and employers with their reluctance to take up the responsibility of childcare. Nevertheless, with the rising awareness of prevention and correction of sexual harassment, the promotion of beneficial treatments and affirmative actions, gender equality in employment is still developing. In late 1990s, the purposed legal reform was finally passed after compromises were reached by Awakening Foundation and the authorities.
By rethinking the typical narrative of The Act of Gender Equality in Employment, I hope to provide an overall review on this act and its legislative background. I also expect that this research to serve as a basis for us to think about further legal reform in the future.

並列關鍵字

feminist legal history ； The Act of Gender Equality in Employment ； standards historical narratives ； prohibition of differential treatment ； prevention and correction of sexual harassment ； measures for promoting equality in employment.

參考文獻

2002兩性工作平等法立法大事紀小組(2002)，兩性工作平等法立法大事紀，台北市：財團法人婦女新知基金會。

───(2005)，從婦女團體的民法親屬編修法運動談女性主義法學的本土實踐，律師雜誌，313期，頁73-82。

王振寰、方孝鼎(1992)，國家機器、勞工政策與勞工運動，台灣社會研究季刊，13期，頁1-29。

王曉丹(2007)，從法社會的觀點論女性主義立法行動 ─ 女性主義法學在台灣的實踐及其法律多元主義的面貌，東吳法律學報，19卷1期，頁51-77。

何明修(2008)，沒有階級認同的勞工運動：台灣的自主工會與兄弟義氣的極限，台灣社會研究季刊，72期，頁49-91。