論勞動爭議行為之罷工糾察─ 以德國法制為借鏡

「一場不需要進行罷工糾察的罷工，始為最具有實力的罷工。」然此以勞工於罷工具有自發性的團結一致行動為前提，在我國工會組織率仍偏低且罷工仍屬罕見的社會發展進程下，罷工糾察反而更屬於我國罷工現場的常態，若罷工未輔以諸如罷工糾察等積極之爭議措施，而僅是單純地不提供勞務，對雇主幾乎無法壓力。我國法目前對於得否在罷工之際發動罷工糾察，迄今並未形成一個普遍的共識，糾察行為在我國目前法制上的法律基礎與法律地位甚為不明，此使勞工難以事先通盤規劃合法的罷工策略，對於罷工的成效影響頗鉅，亦創造行政權恣意介入的空間。本文基此研究動機提出之研究結論為，基於罷工行動的有效性，罷工糾察乃是附隨於罷工進行過程中所不可或缺的手段，為受爭議行為當事人任命之人員，其在罷工中基於特定的地位，執行爭議行為當事人所訂之罷工糾察職務的所有行為，此受到憲法第22條的保障，對於罷工糾察的限制則需符合憲法第23條之規範。當罷工糾察人員勸說、促使勞工加入罷工時，罷工糾察不應被限制於所謂的和平勸說與呼籲的範圍中，否則將與憲法保障罷工有進行真正具有壓力性鬥爭的空間有相當的距離，並採和平非暴力的實力阻止說為罷工糾察行為的界限，故其具體措施不限於精神上的抗爭，更有使用實力以發揮阻礙雇主生產的必要，例如組織罷工人牆、人鏈或罷工通道等涉及實力行使的罷工糾察態樣，只要未超越和平非暴力的界限，可認為達到衡平法益之保障。

關鍵字

罷工糾察；罷工；爭議行為；集體勞動權；罷工權；勞資爭議處理法；罷工通道；罷工人牆；封鎖

並列摘要

It has been said that strikes that do not require strike pickets are the most powerful. However, these require workers to act voluntarily and in solidarity. In Taiwan, the rate of union organization is still very low, and strikes remain rare. Lacking the power to perform collective actions, employees often use strike pickets in strikes, since if a strike is not supported by active actions such as picketing, but simply performed by withholding the labor force, the employer only faces a small amount of pressure. Currently, there is no general consensus in Taiwanese law on the legality of strike pickets. The legal status and requirements of picketing in Taiwan's legal system are very unclear, which makes it difficult for workers and labor unions to plan it in advance. This influences the effectiveness of strikes and creates room for the executive power to intervene arbitrarily. Based on this background and motivation, this research draws the conclusion that strike pickets carried out by the persons appointed by the labor unions are indispensable accompaniments to strike actions that improve their effectiveness. All acts of performing the duties of strike pickets set by the parties to the disputed act shall be guaranteed by Article 22 of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Any restrictions on them are subject to Article 23 of the Constitution. When workers are persuaded and urged to join strikes by the staff of strike pickets, these behaviors should not be limited to peaceful persuasion and appeal. Otherwise, the guarantee in the Constitution that promises workers the right to promote their struggles, such as by organizing a human wall, human chain, or strike passage, will not be upheld. As long as it remains peaceful and non-violent, it can be considered legitimate.

並列關鍵字

strike pickets ； Strike ； Industrial action ； Freedom of association ； Right to strike ； Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes ； Strike passage ； Human wall ； Human chain ； Blockade