工作時間規範之比較研究

工作時間作為勞工重要勞動條件之一，直接影響勞工身心健康及作為雇主對價義務之工資給付，卻未在法律位階予以定義，不僅行政及司法機關各行其事，甚至司法體系中的民事及行政法院皆採不同見解，使得眾說紛紜，勞資政三方皆無所適從。本研究採文獻分析法、比較法及分析歸納法，透過文獻分析對我國及國際勞工組織、歐洲聯盟、德國、日本及美國等公約、法制進行研究，針對工作時間、作為其對立面之休息時間及其中的各種間歇時間（如備勤、待命、候傳、值日（夜）等）、邊際時間進行面向、認定架構及要件分析，再藉由比較法進一步分析優劣，最後則是以分析歸納法來重新定義及區分各類時間，對我國工作時間制度下之各項定義及規定予以建議。本研究認為，應參酌在勞動中之雇主干預及活動內容因素，在法律位階予以工作時間、休息時間明文定義；針對被認定該當工作時間的間歇時間應課以雇主事先約定義務，並在遵守基本工資之規定內開放工資比例化之彈性，使工資面向之工作時間與勞動保護面向之工作時間脫鉤、勞資雙方主給付義務得以平衡；被認定非屬工作時間的間歇時間由於仍課以勞工高於休息時間之義務，應在雇主運用彈性上加以限制；藉由以上建議使勞資間義務平等、勞資政三方有所適從，得以在統一之脈絡及定義下進行事實認定。

關鍵字

工作時間；休息時間；備勤時間；待命時間；候傳時間

並列摘要

As one of the important conditions for labor, working hours directly affects the physical and mental health of labor, and wage is considered as the employer’s obligation. However, it is not defined in the legal hierarchy. Not only did the administrative and judicial organs act independently, but also the civil and administrative courts in the judicial system adopted different opinions, which made the labor, management and government overwhelmed. This research adopted Document Analysis, Comparative law, and Analytic induction. Researching on the covenants and legal systems of our country, the International Labor Organization, the European Union, Germany, Japan, and the United States by using Document Analysis. In addition, focusing on working hours, the rest time as its opposite, and various types of intermittent times (such as standby, on call, waiting for transmission), regular shift, night shift, etc.), marginal time to conduct orientation, identification framework and essential analysis. Using Comparative law to further analyze the pros and cons. Finally, it is based on Analytic induction to redefine and distinguish various types of time, and provide suggestions about definitions and regulations to our working system. It is believed that the employer’s intervention in labor and the content of activities should be considered, and working hours and rest periods should be clearly defined at the legal level. The intermittent hours are deemed to be work hours. The employers should agree to the obligation in advance, and permit the flexibility of wage ratio under the basic wage regulations. Decoupling the working hours of wages from the working hours of labor protection, and balance the main payment obligations of both employers and employees. Intermittent hours are deemed to be non-working hours, and still subject to the obligation of workers to exceed rest hours. Therefore, the flexibility for employers should be restricted. As mentioned above, the equal obligations between labor and management, and the tripartite compliance can carry out fact identification under a unified context and definition.