员工举报行为的法律调整

发布时间：2018-06-08 03:38

本文选题：员工举报 + 忠实义务　；参考：《武汉大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：近些年来,食品安全、产品质量、环境污染等领域侵害公共利益的企业不法行为屡因内部知情人士的举报而见诸报端。员工举报有效弥补了主管机关执法信息的不足,维护和增进了社会公共利益,然而,实施举报的员工却因为举报行为给所在企业造成了经济或声誉上的损失,通常面临着被雇主打击报复的风险。因此,如何通过法律制度的构建与完善,为合法举报的员工提供充分且必要的保护,便成了一项重要且紧迫的议题。员工举报在本文中特指,与用人单位建立劳动关系的劳动者,将其发现或知悉的雇主违法犯罪行为向有权受理机关进行检举、报告的行为。民主法治社会中的举报权利,在法律层面上与封建统治阶级强苛于臣民的告密义务有着根本区别。员工的身份属性决定了其举报行为具有不同于一般公民举报的三个特征:举报前处于获取雇主不法行为信息的优势地位、举报时面临忠于公众与忠于组织的艰难伦理抉择,举报后遭受雇主工作上打击报复的潜在风险。员工举报既是在行使一般法赋予其的举报权利,也是在行使宪法层面的言论自由。但劳动关系的人身性和继续性特质及诚实信用原则的基本要求,决定了员工对其雇主负有忠实义务,员工不得为有害雇主利益之行为。因此,员工举报通常面临着举报权与忠实义务的冲突,及其背后隐含的公共利益和雇主私人利益的冲突。而欲在错综复杂的利益冲突中求得平衡,除了要重塑理性忠实的职场伦理观念以外,更为可行的路径则是对员工举报权的行使进行必要的规范。美国、英国、日本、韩国的举报人保护法制皆设置了员工举报的保护条件,以确保员工规范且正当性地行使举报权利,缓和与其忠实义务的冲突,降低对雇主利益的不必要损害。然而,我国现行有关法律并未对举报权利如何行使作出规范。对比借鉴国外的立法例,本文提出了适合我国法律现状和社会伦理观念的举报正当要件:主观上需为善意且合理相信雇主存在不法行为;内容上应限于违法犯罪行为,尤其是严重侵害公共利益的违法犯罪;程序上应遵循先内后外的一般顺序,向媒体等外部受理人举报时要符合严格的适用前提。法律应为满足以上举报正当要件的员工提供充分的保护与救济,使其免遭雇主的不利对待。我国尚无员工举报保护的专门立法,分散于各法律中的举报条款及劳动立法中的解雇限制和推定解雇的相关规定,尽管为举报员工提供了诸如国外专门立法所确立的信息保密、人身保护、罪责减免和不利处分的禁止与救济这四项保护措施中的一项或多项保护,但仍存在以下不足:对员工举报权与忠实义务冲突的关注不足,未能明确员工举报受保护的前提条件;劳动法与其他相关法律中的举报条款无法有效衔接,保护对象范围狭窄;劳动法中解雇限制、推定解雇的列举式规定,无法穷尽员工遭受的不利对待形式;仲裁或诉讼程序将报复性不利对待争议作为一般劳动争议审查,未综合考察雇主的报复事实,易导致员工遭受实质不公正对待;以及救济措施中的赔偿金数额确定不合理等。考虑到在我国制定一部单独的举报人保护法的时机尚不成熟,本文选择在现行劳动法的基础上对上述不足进行针对性的完善:对劳动法中现有的举报条款进行增补、修订,明确员工举报的正当要件;将举报事项扩大至其他法律所规定的违法犯罪行为,实现各法律的有效衔接;采取列举加概括的方式对员工举报遭受的不利对待形式作出规定;仲裁或诉讼程序中,将雇主报复事实纳入劳动争议的特殊考量因素;赋予仲裁员或法官一定的自由裁量权,允许其在法定赔偿金之外,结合举报员工的实际损害,在法定最高限额之下,确立合理的赔偿数额。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the illegal behavior of enterprises in the fields of food safety, product quality, environmental pollution and other fields of public interests has been reported repeatedly for the inadequacy of the insider information. The employee reports effectively make up for the deficiencies of the law enforcement information of the competent authorities and maintain and enhance the public interests. However, the employees who have reported it have been reported to be responsible for the report. It is an important and urgent issue to establish and improve the legal system to provide adequate and necessary protection to employees who are legally reported. The labourer of the relationship has a fundamental difference between the report right in the democratic rule of law society and the informant obligation of the feudal ruling class at the legal level. The identity attribute of the employee determines that the reporting behavior of the employee is different from that of the feudal ruling class. The three features reported by the general citizen: the predominance of the information of obtaining the wrongful act of the employer before the report is reported, faced with the difficult ethical choice of the public and the organization, and the potential risk of retaliation on the employer's job after reporting. The employee report is not only the right to report it in the exercise of the general law, but also the exercise of the constitution. The legal level of freedom of speech. But the basic requirements of the personal and continuing nature of labor relations and the principle of honesty and credit, determine the employees' loyalty to their employers and the behavior of the employees not to be harmful to the interests of the employers. Therefore, the staff report is usually confronted with the conflict between the right of reporting and the duty of loyalty, and the public interest behind it. The conflict between the personal interests of the employer and the personal interests of the employer. In order to balance the intricate conflicts of interest, the more feasible way is to regulate the exercise of the employee's reporting right, except to remould the rational and faithful ethical concept of the workplace. The protection of the news from the United States, Britain, Japan and Korea has set up the protection of the employee's report. Conditions, in order to ensure the employees' rights to be reported in a standardized and proper manner, to mitigate the conflict with their faithful obligations and to reduce unnecessary damage to the interests of the employers. However, the current relevant laws of our country do not regulate the exercise of the right to report the report. The legitimate requisites of the idea: subjectively and reasonably believe in the existence of wrongful acts of the employer in good faith; the content should be limited to illegal and criminal acts, especially the illegal crimes that seriously infringe on the public interests; the procedure should follow the general order of the first inside and outside, and comply with the strict applicable premise when the media and other external admissible persons are reported. The law should be in accordance with the law. Employees are provided with adequate protection and relief to avoid the adverse treatment of employers. There is no special legislation for employee reporting protection in our country, the provisions of reports in various laws, and relevant regulations on dismissal and presumption of dismissal in labor legislation, although it provides a foreign special for reporting employees. One or more protection of the four protection measures, such as information secrecy, personal protection, guilt reduction and disadvantageous punishment, has been established in the door legislation, but there are still the following deficiencies: lack of attention to the conflict between the employee's reporting right and the duty of loyalty, and the failure to clear the premise of the protection of the employees; labor law and other relevant laws The reporting provisions in the law can not be effectively connected, the scope of the protection object is narrow; the enumerated provisions of dismissal in labor law and presumption of dismissal can not exhaustion the disadvantageous form of the employees' treatment; the arbitration or litigation procedure will take retaliatory disadvantageous treatment as a general labor dispute and do not comprehensively examine the fact of the employer's retaliation and easily lead to the staff. It is not reasonable for the workers to be treated in substance; and the amount of the compensation in the relief measures is not reasonable. Considering that the timing of a separate protection law in China is not yet ripe, this article chooses to improve the above deficiencies on the basis of the current labor law: to supplement the existing reporting provisions in the labor law, Revise, clarify the legitimate requisites of the staff report; expand the report matters to the illegal and criminal acts prescribed by other laws, realize the effective connection of the various laws; take the form of enumerating and generalizations to stipulate the adverse treatment forms of the employees' reports; in the arbitration or litigation procedure, the employer will retaliate the facts into the special labor dispute. Consideration of factors; give arbitrators or judges the discretion to allow them to establish a reasonable amount of compensation under the legal maximum limit, in addition to the legal damages, and to report the actual damage of the employees.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.5

【相似文献】