臺灣與日本不當勞動行為救濟命令界限之比較研究

A Comparative Study on the Limitation of Relief Order for Unfair Labor Practice between Taiwan and Japan

洪瑮蓁(LI-CHEN HUNG)

指導教授 ： 侯岳宏

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系一般生組/碩士(2016年)

摘要

為保障勞工團結權及協商權，迅速排除不當勞動行為，回復集體勞資關係之正常運作，我國100年5月1日起修正施行之新勞動三法(工會法、團體協約法及勞資爭議處理法)，正式導入不當勞動行為裁決制度。
不當勞動行為裁決制度是否能迅速有效救濟、遏止雇主打壓弱化工會之行為，最關鍵的部分在於裁決委員會救濟命令之核發。依「勞資爭議處理法」第51條第2項規定，雖賦予裁決委員會對於救濟命令之內容具有一定之裁量權限，然觀察目前我國行政法院之判決，屢有以裁決委員會已逾越裁量權界限為由，而將救濟命令予以撤銷者。因此本論文擬以「救濟命令之界限」為研究中心，觀察行政法院所認定之裁決委員會救濟命令之裁量權界限為何？法院以何種基準認定裁決委員會已逾越裁量權之界限？裁決委員會發布之救濟命令內容有如何調整之空間，始能免於遭受行政法院撤銷之結果？並進一步探究行政法院不尊重裁決委員會之判斷，易於撤銷救濟命令之原因何在？裁決委員會之組織構成或不當勞動行為救濟制度整體之設計對於救濟命令有何影響？行政法院所持立場是否正確，未來是否應予調整？凡此均為本論文擬探討問題之所在。
針對前述問題意識，本論文於研究方法上係透過案例分析法，觀察不當勞動行為裁決制度施行迄今，行政法院於個案中對救濟命令界限所抱持之態度，以分析瞭解我國救濟命令及救濟制度面臨之問題點。此外鑒於作為我國修法引進不當勞動行為裁決制度重要參考之日本，其勞動委員會對於救濟命令之核發已有數十年經驗之累積，而有比較研究之價值與實益，本論文乃從比較法考察之立場，以文獻分析法之方式，對我國與日本之相關文獻進行蒐集整理，並藉由從中獲得之資料，比較檢討兩國之異同，從中分析兩國之利弊得失，盼借鏡日本救濟命令多元發布之內容及七十年制度運作累積之經驗，嘗試對我國救濟命令及救濟制度面臨之問題點，提出解決之道。

關鍵字

不當勞動行為 ； 裁決委員會 ； 救濟命令 ； 涉及私權爭議 ； 非涉及私權爭議

並列摘要

In order to protect the right to organize and the right to bargain collectively of the laborers, to timely remove unfair labor practices, and to restore the normal operations of collective labor relationship, Taiwan implemented the new three labor laws (the Labor Union Act, the Collective Agreement Act, and the Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes) on May 1st, 2011, and formally introduced the unfair labor practice ruling system.
The key for the unfair labor practice ruling system to quickly and effectively curb the employer’s behavior of pressuring and weakening the labor union is the issuing of the relief order by the Tribunal. According to the provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article 51 of the Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes, although the law gives a certain discretionary authority to the Tribunal’s relief orders, the judgment of the administrative court has repeatedly revoked the Tribunal’s relief orders on the ground that the Tribunal went beyond the discretion limit. Therefore, this article mainly focused on "the limitation of relief orders" and observe what the limitation of the Tribunal’s relief orders is as recognized by the administrative court, on what basis the court judges that the Tribunal has exceeded the discretion limit, and how the contents of the relief orders can be adjusted to avoid being revoked by the administrative court. The article further explores the reasons for the administrative court to not respect the judgment of Tribunal and easily revoke relief orders, the impact of the Tribunal’s structure or the design of the unfair labor practice relief system on relief orders, and whether the position held by the administrative court is correct or should be adjusted in the future.
In view of the aforementioned issues, this article adopts the case analysis method to observe the attitude of the administrative court on the limitation of relief orders since the implementation of the unfair labor practice ruling system, in order to analyze and understand the problems faced by the relief orders and relief system in Taiwan. Given the fact that in Japan, which our country used as an important reference for the introduction of the unfair labor practice ruling system, its adjudication board has accumulated decades of experience in the issuing of relief orders which is valuable and beneficial for a comparative study, this article adopts a comparative study and literature analysis method to collect and sort the related literature in Taiwan and Japan to obtain the data required, in order to compare the similarities and differences, and analyze the pros and cons between the two countries. It is expected that through the contents of Japan’s relief orders which are issued through multiple channels and its system’s seventy years of operating experience, the article try to propose a solution to the problem faced by the relief orders and relief system in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

Unfair Labor Practices ； Tribunal for Unfair Labor Practices ； Relief Order ； Private Rights Related Disputes ； Non-private Rights Related Disputes

參考文獻

侯岳宏，ILO有關勞工團結權之公約與日本的不當勞動行為制度，臺灣國際法季刊，第5卷第2期，2008年6月

侯岳宏，美國與日本不當勞動行為裁決機制之研究，政大法學評論，第114期，2010年4月。

侯岳宏，不當勞動行為裁決機制的「行政」救濟與「私法」決定之檢討－以日本制度為借鏡，臺北大學法學論叢，第76期，2010年12月。

侯岳宏，從日本法檢討我國工會法不利益待遇解僱之規定，臺北大學法學論叢，第80期，2011年12月。

侯岳宏，日本非法解僱期間工資與中間收入扣除之發展與啟示，政大法學評論，第128期，2012年8月。