用人单位规章制度合理性研究

发布时间：2018-02-25 18:20

本文关键词： 规章制度合理性效力判定法律缺漏实务困惑完善建议　出处：《苏州大学》2016年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：劳动规章制度,也就是《劳动法》中所采用的用人单位规章制度这一概念,是用人单位制定的组织劳动过程和进行劳动管理的规则与制度的总和。1作为管理劳动者的一种辅助性手段,实践中,用人单位为了最大程度制约劳动行为,往往会将规章制度的管理范围设定的十分广泛,使得部分内容明显超越了对劳动者在生产经营活动中行为的规制,已然造成了对其个人生活的干预,这种规章制度虽然在内容上没有违反法律规定,但是却明显不具备合理性。由于我国《劳动合同法》中只规定了规章制度应当具备合法性要素,对欠缺合理性规章制度的相关问题并没有涉及,因而实践中就欠缺合理性的规章制度是否具有法律效力、规章制度合理性的审查权主体以及合理性的认定标准等一系列问题存在争议,司法实务中就该问题所面临的困惑也日渐突出。因此,本文着力对合理性是否应作为规章制度的必备生效要件、现行法律规定存在的缺漏与实务中的困惑、规章制度合理性的内生性考量因素以及规章制度合理性规定的完善建议等问题进行探讨。文章以引言中案例“员工乘坐黑车上下班被解雇”为切入点,按照“提出问题、分析问题、解决问题”的思路,将全文分为以下四个部分。第一部分,对用人单位规章制度合理性的含义及法律意义进行分析。含义部分包括用人单位规章制度的概念、性质、特征、合理性的概念以及合法性与合理性的关系;在此基础上探讨合理性对规章制度效力判定的影响,首先列举不同观点对合理性是否应作为规章制度生效要件的理论争议,然后提出笔者观点:欠缺合理性的规章制度不能作为用人单位的管理依据。第二部分,就现行法律关于用人单位规章制度合理性问题的规定进行逐部缕析,探讨现阶段法律规定存在的缺漏与不足,即由于上位立法中欠缺对规章制度合理性问题的明确规定,使得全国各地方性规定中立法各异、不相统一;与此同时,提出司法实务中所面临的困惑:即对法院和仲裁委是否具有规章制度合理性审查权的争议,以及民主程序与规章制度合理性的条件关系问题。第三部分,论述用人单位规章制度合理性的内生性考量因素。分别从程序性因素与实体性因素着手,以归纳规章制度所设制度利益的方式论证合理性的实体性考量因素应包括以下三个部分:“用人单位自主管理”是规章制度设定的制度初衷、“生产经营活动”是规章制度设定的制度界限以及“保障劳动权利”是规章制度设定的制度目标。第四部分,针对前文指出的现行法律规定存在的不足与司法实务中所面临的困惑,提出相应的完善建议,即通过法律立法明确规定规章制度应具备合理性要素、明确裁判机构的规章制度合理性审查权以及确定规章制度合理性的审查标准。
[Abstract]:The concept of employing unit rules and regulations, which is used in the Labor Law, It is the summation of the rules and systems of organizing labor process and carrying out labor management formulated by the employing unit as an auxiliary means of managing the laborer. In practice, in order to restrict labor behavior to the greatest extent, the unit of choose and employ persons, The rules and regulations are often set to a very wide range of management, so that part of the content obviously beyond the regulation of workers in production and business activities, has caused interference in their personal lives, Although such rules and regulations do not violate the legal provisions in content, they are obviously not reasonable. Since China's Labor contract Law only stipulates that the rules and regulations should have the elements of legality, The lack of reasonable rules and regulations is not involved in the relevant issues, so in practice, whether the lack of reasonable rules and regulations have legal effect, A series of issues such as the subject of the right to review the rationality of the rules and regulations and the criteria for the determination of the rationality are controversial, and the confusion about this issue is becoming increasingly prominent in the judicial practice. This paper focuses on whether rationality should be regarded as the necessary effective element of the rules and regulations, the gaps existing in the current laws and regulations and the confusion in practice. This paper discusses the endogenous considerations of the rationality of rules and regulations and the suggestions for the perfection of the rules and regulations. The article starts with the case of "employees being dismissed from work in black cars", and puts forward the questions according to "." The article is divided into the following four parts: the first part analyzes the rationality and legal significance of the rules and regulations of the employing unit. The meaning part includes the concept and nature of the rules and regulations of the unit of choose and employ persons. On the basis of analyzing the influence of rationality on the validity of rules and regulations, the author first lists the theoretical disputes on whether rationality should be regarded as the effective elements of rules and regulations. Then I put forward the author's point of view: the lack of reasonable rules and regulations can not be taken as the management basis of the unit of choose and employ persons. The second part, the current law on the rationality of the rules and regulations of the unit of choose and employ persons is analyzed part by part. This paper discusses the deficiencies and deficiencies of the current legal provisions, that is, the lack of clear provisions on the rationality of the rules and regulations in the upper legislation, which makes the local regulations of the whole country different and not unified; at the same time, The puzzles in judicial practice are put forward, that is, whether the court and the arbitration commission have the right to examine the rationality of the rules and regulations, and the relationship between the democratic procedure and the rationality of the rules and regulations. This paper discusses the endogenous factors of the reasonableness of the rules and regulations of the employer. The substantive consideration of the reasonableness in the way of concluding the system interests established by the rules and regulations should include the following three parts: "the unit of choose and employ persons' autonomous management" is the original intention of the rules and regulations, and "production and management activities" are the rules and regulations. The institutional boundaries set by the chapter system and the "protection of labor rights" are the institutional objectives set by the rules and regulations. Part 4th, In view of the shortcomings of the existing laws and regulations and the confusion in the judicial practice, this paper puts forward the corresponding suggestions for perfection, that is, the rules and regulations should have reasonable elements by means of legal legislation. To define the authority of reviewing the rules and regulations of the referee and to determine the standards for the review of the reasonableness of the rules and regulations.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D922.5

【相似文献】