【作者】 程凌；

【导师】 喻术红；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 经济法学， 2021， 博士

【摘要】 劳动给付是劳动合同的主给付义务,在劳动合同的履行中居于核心地位。但是,在劳动合同的实际履行中,劳动者可能出于自身、用人单位抑或其他方面的原因而无法履行劳动给付义务。在日常实践与重大事件中,比如金融危机、新冠疫情等,劳动给付义务不履行成为劳动法领域的热点问题。此时,劳动给付义务不履行的法律效果,包括工资、解雇、损害赔偿,往往成为各种纠纷的焦点。劳动给付义务不履行作为劳动合同领域的关键问题,其法律效果的分析应当以债务不履行的一般理论为基础,同时根据劳动合同的特殊性予以社会化修正。劳动给付义务不履行系主给付义务之根本未提供,在通常情形下具有违法性,此时须进一步考量解雇与损害赔偿问题。但是,如果劳动给付义务不履行具备免责事由,则其违法性被推翻,此时须进一步考量工资给付问题。劳动给付义务不履行的免责事由作为其法律效果判断的前提与基础,其内容所涵盖的范围至关重要。从类型化角度出发,劳动给付义务不履行的免责事由主要包括:第一,用人单位违反义务,包括工资给付义务、保护义务、受领义务等三个方面。第二,劳动给付义务与劳动者的其他权利义务相冲突,包括劳动给付义务与劳动者的宪法基本权利、其他法律权利相冲突,劳动给付义务与劳动者的宪法义务、法律义务、道德义务相冲突。关于劳动给付义务不履行的免责事由,我国当前立法所涵盖的内容非常有限,主要集中于劳动安全领域用人单位“违章指挥、强令冒险作业”以及有限的休假类别方面。对此,要完善劳动给付义务不履行的免责事由,首先,须在具体内涵方面对“违章指挥、强令冒险作业”进行扩张解释;其次,须精细化构建我国的休假事由类别;最后,将给付不具有期待可能性理论作为劳动给付与劳动者其他权利义务冲突时拒绝提供劳动的理论基础,以《民法典》第580条第1款第2项“债务标的不适用于强制履行”作为规范依据,通过限缩解释将债务标的阐释为具有人身专属性特点的给付。就给付的牵连关系而言,工资是劳动的对价。但是,工资还具有特殊性,通常情形下为劳动者的主要生活来源,因而工资还涉及劳动者的生存权保障意涵。因此,关于劳动给付义务不履行具备免责事由时的工资给付问题,一方面须回归劳动给付与工资给付之间的牵连关系,以归责为基础构建工资给付的一般规则;另一方面,还须考量工资给付的社会化保护。就工资给付的一般规则而言,在劳动者具有归责事由的情形下,劳动者当然无工资给付请求权;在用人单位具有归责事由的情形下,劳动者则享有工资给付请求权。如果用人单位与劳动者对劳动给付义务不履行双方均不可归责,在不考量社会化保护的情形下,劳动者通常无工资给付请求权,此为“无劳动则无报酬”原则之体现。但是,随着劳动法社会化保护的发展,倾斜保护劳动者的价值理念不断加强,工资作为生存基础的特性不断受到关注,工资的社会化保护成为劳动法的重要内容。在工资给付的社会化保护方面,由用人单位承担经济风险、经营风险以及特定情形下劳动者个人领域障碍的工资给付风险,突破了“无劳动无报酬”原则。就我国立法而言,以归责为核心的工资给付一般规则须通过风险负担路径进行构建,相关规定不仅应体现于我国劳动法的相关规定中,其一般性的规定更应体现于未来我国雇佣合同中。在工资给付的社会化保护层面,一方面,用人单位承担经济风险与经营风险情形下的工资给付规则须通过雇主受领迟延制度的构建予以实现,另一方面,关于用人单位承担劳动者领域障碍的工资风险规定之完善,则应注重风险分配的弹性化构建,对有薪休假进行扩张,同时考量工资给付风险的第三方分担。就劳动给付义务不履行不具备免责事由的情形,其法律效果涉及解雇与损害赔偿两个方面的问题。在解雇方面,应当区分雇主解雇权的类型,并分别考察劳动给付义务不履行成立相应解雇情形的要件。同时,劳动给付义务不履行的解雇问题还应当注意用人单位解雇权的行使限度。在立法层面,我国当前立法对解雇权的限制主要体现在解雇事由方面。但是,由于我国解雇事由采取了列举的方式,相关规定无法涵盖实践中的所有情形,比如,劳动给付义务不履行既非过错解雇的法定事由、又非用人单位规章制度规定解雇的过错行为、亦非无过错解雇的法定事由、且劳动者拒绝协商解除的情形。此时,用人单位解雇权的行使限度成为关键问题。对此,提出通过最后手段性原则确定解雇的必要性,通过利益衡量原则综合考量个案的各项因素,以实现解雇权的限制。至于劳动给付义务不履行的损害赔偿问题,则应当从损害赔偿的责任成立与责任范围两个层面对进行考察。在损害赔偿责任的成立方面,明确责任的成立要件以过错归责为基础,在损害赔偿责任的范围方面,不仅须明确损害的类型,同时还须通过相当因果关系、与有过失及生计酌减等三条路径对责任范围进行限制,以防止用人单位将经营风险转嫁于劳动者,贯彻倾斜保护劳动者的社会保护思想。更多还原

【Abstract】 Labor performance is the main obligation of employment contract,and it plays a central role in the performance of employment contract.However,due to reasons from employee,employer or others,employee may not be able to perform labor obligation actually.In daily practice and major events,such as the financial crisis in2008 and COVID-19 epidemic in 2020,non-fulfilment of labor obligation has become a hot issue in the field of labor law.And the legal effects of labor obligation non-fulfillment,including wages,dismissal,and compensation for damages,often become the focus of various disputes.The non-performance of labor obligation is a key issue in the field of labor contract,and the analysis of its legal effects should be based on the general theory of non-fulfillment of obligation,and at the same time,socialized amendments should be made according to the particularity of labor contract.The non-fulfillment of the labor obligation means that labor obligation is not provide at all,which is illegal under normal circumstances.In this case,further consideration must be given to the issue of dismissal and damages.However,if the non-performance of labor obligation has a exemption reason,its illegality will be overturned,and the issue of wage must be further considered.The exemption reason for non-fulfillment of labor obligation is the prerequisite and basis for the judgment of its legal effects,and its scope is of great importance.From the perspective of categorization,the exemption reasons for non-fulfillment of labor obligation mainly include: Firstly,employer breaches obligation,including wage obligation,protection obligation,and acceptance obligation.Secondly,labor obligation conflicts with other rights and obligations of employee,including labor obligation conflicting with labor’s basic constitutional rights and other legal rights,and labor obligation conflicting with employee’s constitutional,legal,and moral obligations.Regarding the exemption reasons for non-fulfillment of labor obligation,current legislation covers very limited content,mainly focusing on "violating the rules and forcing dangerous operations" by employers in the field of labor safety and limited types of leave.To improve the exemption reasons for non-fulfillment of labor obligations,firstly,expansion interpretation of "violating command and forcing dangerous operations" must be made from the perspectives of specific connotations;secondly,it’s necessary to refine the types of vacation causes;finally,as the theoretical basis for refusal to labor performance when labor obligation conflicts with other rights and obligations of labors,the theory that it does not have the expected possibility for labor performance should be applied.Article 580,paragraph 1,item 2of Chinese Civil Code,"debt subject does not apply to compulsory performance",should be applied as the normative basis,and the subject of debt is supposed to be understood as performance with the personal characteristics through limited interpretation.As far as exchange relationship is concerned,wage is the consideration for labor performance.However,wage is also special and generally the main source of life for employee.Wage also involves the protection of employee’s right to life.Therefore,with regard to the issue of wage when employee has a exemption reason,on the one hand,the consideration relationship between labor performance and wage payment should be focused,and general rules for wage payment shoud be based on imputation;on the other hand,it is also crutial to consider wage social protection.As far as the general rules of wage is concerned,when mployee has the cause of imputation,he/she certainly has no right to claim the wage.For non-fulfilment of labor obligation,the employee has the right to claim wage when the employer has the cause of imputation.However,if both employer and employee have no cause of imputation to the non-fulfillment of labor obligation,and without considering social protection,employee usually has no right to claim wage payment.This is the manifestation of the principle of "NO Work,No Pay".However,with the development of the socialized protection in labor law,the value of more protection for employee has been continuously strengthened,and the characteristic of wage as the basis of life has been constantly concerned,and socialized protection in wage regulations has become much more important in labor law.Regarding socialized protection in wage payment,if the cause for non-fulfillment of labor obligation originates from the economic risk and operational risk of employer,or labor’s personal field under certain circumstances,employer assumes wage payment burden,breaking "No Work,No Pay" principle.As far as current legislation is concerned,the general rules of wage payment with imputation as the core must be constructed through the path of risk burden of wage.Relevant regulations should not only be reflected in the relevant provisions of current labor law,but the general legislations should also be reflected in the future employment contract.At the level of socialized protection in wage payment,on the one hand,the rules for employer bearing wage burden in economic risks and operational risks must be realized through the establishment of the employer’s default in acceptance;on the other hand,regarding the improvement of regulations on employer bearing wage risk from employee’s personal field,much more attention should be paid to the flexibility of risk allocation,the expansion of paid vacation and third-party taking wage burden.In the case that there’s no exemption reason for non-fulfillment of labor obligation,its legal effects involve dismissal and compensation for damages.In terms of dismissal,the types of dismissal rights of employers should be distinguished,and whether non-fulfillment of labor obligation meet the requirements for corresponding dismissal circumstances should be investigated separately,especially the objective and subjective requirements in default dismissal.At the same time,with regard to the issue of dismissal where the labor performance is not provided at all,attention should be paid to the exercise limit of the dismissal right.At legislative level,current legislation restrictions to dismissal right mainly exist in the cause for dismissal.However,due to the enumeration path in cause for dismissal adopted by labor law,relevant regulations cannot cover all situations in practice.For example,non-fulfilment of labor obligation may be neither a statutory reason for faulty dismissal,nor be it a faulty act of dismissal stipulated by the employer’s rules and regulations,and not the circumstances where there is a legal cause for no-fault dismissal,and even employee refuses to negotiate on dismissal.In this case,the limitation on employer’s right to dismissal becomes a key issue.Therefore,much attention should be paid to the limitation of dismissal right,through ultima-ratio principle to determine the necessity of dismissal,and through benefit measurement principle to comprehensively consider various factors of the case.Regarding the issue of damage compensation for non-fulfillment of labor obligation,it should be investigated from two aspects,including the establishment of liability and the scope of liability.Regarding the establishment of liability for damages in non-fulfillment of labor obligation,,it is necessary to clarify the establishment requirements of liability should be based on fault imputation.Regarding the scope of liability for damages,the types of damage should be clarified,and the scope of responsibility should be restricted through considerable causality,contributory negligence and reduction due to living protection,in order to prevent employer from transferring operational risk to employee,and implement the social protection value favoring more protection of labor.更多还原