调职行为的法律规制

发布时间：2018-08-09 17:07

【摘要】：据统计,由于调职行为所产生的劳动争议,目前占到了劳动争议的20%~30%,而遗憾的是,法律对于调职行为的规制却并不完善。允许企业在一定情况下的调职行为,是维护企业用工自主权的现实需要,但是不当调职行为则会损害劳动者的权利,激化劳资矛盾。本文立足于我国目前关于调职行为的法律规制现状,对完善调职行为的法律规制做出一些尝试。文章的第一部分分析了对调职行为进行法律规制的必要性。调职行为可以大大的提高企业的用工灵活性,是企业面对市场剧烈变动,优化企业结构的现实需求,从正面角度肯定了调职行为存在的必要性。同时分析了调职行为可能对劳动者的自主选择权、休息权、劳动报酬权带来的不利影响,从维护劳动者权利的角度分析了调职行为法律规制的必要性。最后,对调职行为进行法律规制,是为了实现劳动法劳资双方利益平衡的立法目的,防止对一方利益的过分保护使得劳资双方利益失衡。文章的第二部分立足于现状,分析了我国目前关于调职行为法律规制的现状。由于劳动监察部门认为调职争议应交由诉讼和仲裁途径解决,故而笔者从立法和司法两个角度进行了分析。立法方面,对于法定调职行为笔者梳理了相关立法,而对于约定调职行为没有相关法律规定,只能参考关于劳动合同变更的法律规定,这在司法实践中产生了颇多争议。司法角度,笔者整理了40份相关案例,从中选取了一些典型案例,总结出了在司法裁判中,法院认定调职行为具备合理性时所考虑的具体要素。通过第二部分的分析,调职行为的法律规制目前存在一些问题,故而在第三部分,主要分析了调职行为法律规制所存在的具体问题。首先,约定调职的法律规定处于空白状态,各地所出台的审理意见也存在不小冲突,有些认为约定调职条款是有效的,而有些则认为是对劳动合同变更需要“协商一致”的突破,应该无效。而关于约定调职这个问题,我国法律并没有明确说明。第二,对于调职的程序的法律规定缺失。对调职行为不光应有实体上的法律规制,程序上的法律规制也是十分必要的。第三,在具体的司法裁判中,法院对于调职行为的合理性裁判没有形成一个裁判体系,同案不同判现象比较严重。第四部分将对调职行为法律规制的完善提供一些建议。首先,对于约定调职行为,法律有必要做出具体的规定。笔者通过对概括合意说、劳动契约说、特约说、否认说的学说进行比较分析,同时结合我国现状,认为约定调职条款应是有效的,法律中应做出明确说明;第二,对于调职行为所应遵从的程序,笔者认为应该至少有三个步骤,使得调职的程序更加完善。第三,针对调职行为的合理性裁判存在的标准不统一的问题,笔者架构了一个关于合理性的裁判体系,希望未来可以通过司法解释的方式做出规定,统一合理性的裁判标准。
[Abstract]:According to statistics, because of the labor dispute caused by the transfer behavior, it accounts for 20% of the labor dispute, but unfortunately, the regulation of the transfer behavior is not perfect. To allow enterprises to transfer under certain circumstances is the practical need to maintain the autonomy of employment, but improper transfer will damage the rights of workers and intensify labor conflicts. Based on the current situation of legal regulation on transfer in China, this paper makes some attempts to perfect the legal regulation of transfer. The first part of the article analyzes the necessity of legal regulation of transfer. The transfer behavior can greatly improve the flexibility of the employment of enterprises, which is the realistic demand for enterprises to face the drastic changes in the market and optimize the enterprise structure. The necessity of the transfer behavior is affirmed from a positive point of view. At the same time, this paper analyzes the adverse effects of the transfer behavior on the workers' independent choice, rest right and labor compensation right, and analyzes the necessity of the legal regulation of the transfer behavior from the angle of safeguarding the workers' rights. Finally, the legal regulation of transfer is to achieve the legislative purpose of balancing the interests of labor and management, and to prevent the excessive protection of the interests of one party from making the interests of both employers and employees out of balance. The second part of the article is based on the current situation, analyzes the current situation of legal regulation of transfer behavior in China. Because the labor supervision department thinks that the transfer dispute should be settled by litigation and arbitration, the author analyzes it from the angle of legislation and judicature. In the legislative aspect, the author combs the relevant legislation for the statutory transfer, but for the agreed transfer, there are no relevant legal provisions, can only refer to the legal provisions on the change of labor contract, which has produced a lot of disputes in judicial practice. From the judicial point of view, the author sorted out 40 relevant cases, selected some typical cases, summed up the specific elements considered when the court found that the transfer behavior is reasonable in the judicial decision. Through the second part of the analysis, there are some problems in the legal regulation of transfer behavior, so in the third part, it mainly analyzes the specific problems existing in the legal regulation of transfer behavior. First of all, the legal provisions on the agreed transfer are blank, and there are no small conflicts in the trial opinions issued by various localities. Some think that the terms of the agreed transfer are valid. Some think that the labor contract change needs to be "consensus" breakthrough, should be invalid. But regarding the agreement transfer this question, our country law does not have the explicit explanation. Second, the legal provisions of the transfer procedure are missing. It is necessary not only to regulate the transfer, but also to regulate the procedure. Third, in the concrete judicial decision, the court does not form a judgment system for the rationality of the transfer behavior, and the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case is more serious. The fourth part will provide some suggestions to improve the legal regulation of transfer behavior. First of all, it is necessary for the law to make specific provisions for the agreed transfer. The author makes a comparative analysis of the theories of general agreement, labor contract theory, denial theory, and at the same time, considering the present situation of our country, thinks that the terms of agreement and transfer should be effective and should be clearly explained in the law; second, The author thinks that there should be at least three steps to make the transfer procedure more perfect. Thirdly, in view of the problem that the standard of reasonable judgment of transfer behavior is not uniform, the author constructs a system of judgment about rationality, hoping that in the future it can be stipulated by way of judicial interpretation and unified with the judgment standard of rationality.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D922.5

【相似文献】