【作者】 黄婷；

【导师】 章亮明；

【作者基本信息】 南昌大学 ， 经济法学， 2022， 硕士

【摘要】 工伤认定“48小时”条款自2003年《工伤保险条例》出台就受到广泛关注,直至2010年对该条例进行修订仍未修改,更是引起激烈讨论。如今在新冠疫情背景下,各种新业态踊跃出现,各种新情形层出不穷,加之立法中没有明确规定“48小时”条款的认定标准,司法实践中对此理解存在较大差异,关于“48小时”条款的争议更是有增无减。因此,结合“48小时”条款及相关概念的历史由来,总结分析学术界的各种学说争议,再通过现实案例论证存在的实践问题,最终有针对性的提出具体完善建议,进而推动我国工伤认定“48小时”条款的实施确有必要。本文除引言外,共分为四部分内容。第一部分为工伤认定“48小时”条款的基本内涵。介绍了工伤、视同工伤、“48小时”条款的概念及由来,对“48小时”条款有一个整体的把握。通过对“48小时”条款与职业病、过劳死、工伤认定第14条的关系,确认其体系地位。此外,介绍了有关“48小时”条款的学术争议,主要有属性之争和存废之争,通过对不同观点的分析得出自己的结论。第二、三部分为“48小时”条款在实务中存在的问题。通过对新冠疫情期间一些具有代表性的视同工伤认定案例进行分析,提炼出“48小时”条款适用时在工作时间、工作岗位、突发疾病、48小时时限方面存在的困惑。第四部分是对“48小时”条款的完善建议。首先,明确了工作时间和工作岗位的认定原则,即工作时间的认定应当以是否受用人单位支配为标准,工作岗位的认定应当以处理的事项是否为用人单位利益为标准;其次,界定了48小时的起止时间,即以医疗机构作出最终诊疗方案的时间为48小时的起算点,以脑死亡为死亡的认定标准来确定死亡时间;最后,提出以文义解释方法理解突发疾病,非突发性的伤病不符合该条款,并引入突发疾病的专业鉴定委员会。更多还原

【Abstract】 The "48 hours" clause of work injury recognition has been widely concerned since the introduction of the "Regulations on Work Injury Insurance" in 2003,and has not been amended until the revision of the regulations in 2010,which has caused intense discussions.Nowadays,in the context of the new epidemic,various new industries have emerged and various new situations have emerged,coupled with the fact that the legislation does not clearly stipulate the criteria for determining the "48 hours" clause,there are differences in the understanding of working time,work position,sudden illness and 48 hours time limit in practice.The controversy about the "48 hours" clause is increasing.Therefore,it is necessary to sort out the historical development and academic controversies of the "48 hours" clause,analyze the practical problems with real cases,and then put forward relevant suggestions on the recognition criteria,so as to promote the perfection of China’s work injury recognition system.In addition to the introduction,this paper is divided into four parts.The first part is the basic connotation of the "48 hours" clause of work injury recognition.The concept and origin of work injury,deemed work injury and "48 hours" clause are introduced,and the development and evolution of "48 hours" clause is described as a whole to provide a basis for the next stage of research.In addition,the relationship between the "48 hours" clause and occupational disease,overwork death,and Article14 of the Work Injury Recognition System is confirmed.In addition,the academic controversies about the "48 hours" clause are introduced,mainly the controversies about its attributes and the controversies about its existence and abolition.The "48hours clause" is to reflect the tendency to protect the workers,and the "disease" which is not part of the work injury situation to get the compensation by analogy with the work injury,has the necessity of existence,and should not be abolished,but should be refined and adjusted through the judicial interpretation,etc.The second and third parts are the confusion in the application of the "48 hours" clause.It can be seen from the typical cases of deemed work-related injuries during the new epidemic that the existing legal provisions on deemed work-related injuries are not perfect in terms of the definition of working hours and positions,the scope of sudden illnesses and the "48 hours" provision,resulting in a lot of disputes on the application of the "48 hours" provision.The application of the "48 hours" clause is controversial.The fourth part is the suggestion to improve the "48 hours" clause.Firstly,the principles of working time and working position are clarified,that is,the working time should be determined by whether it is at the disposal of the employer,and the working position should be determined by whether the matters handled are for the benefit of the employer.Finally,the interpretation of the text to understand the sudden illness,non-sudden injury or illness does not meet the provisions,and the introduction of the "sudden illness" professional appraisal committee.更多还原