【作者】 刘诚；

【导师】 赵一迪；

【作者基本信息】 上海师范大学 ， 民商法， 2020， 硕士

【摘要】 解雇关系到劳动者赖以为生的工作权以及最为基本的生存权,其在劳动关系中的重要地位不言而喻,解雇权的滥用或不当行使会使得本就于劳资关系中处于弱势地位的劳动者基本权益难以得到保障,个人利益的丧失会在一定程度上影响整个社会的平衡以及和谐稳定,因此解雇权发展理论顺应时代发展要求而从最初的解雇自由发展至今几乎被国际所普遍认可的正当事由说,各国开始逐步于立法中显现出对不当解雇的限制以及对遭受不当解雇雇员的法律救济以及保护。反观我国《劳动法》和《劳动合同法》因各种因素综合作用的原因使得其不仅没有采用不当解雇一词,也在用人单位单方解除劳动合同立法上以较少的条文对用人单位单方解除劳动合同的权利予以较低的限制,且不同于国际上所普遍采用的概括性规定不当解雇的内涵,我国对用人单位单方解除劳动合同的情形予以法定列举,因此学界对于我国对用人单位解雇权限制的强弱一直存在争论。本文从不当解雇的概念界定起始,在对不当解雇保护的法理基础进行深入探析的同时,对国际上不当解雇保护立法或实践较为完善或先进的国家进行比较借鉴,以德、美、英、法、日为代表,以期在此基础上能够对比发现我国劳动法律法规对不当解雇认定以及保护的不足并有针对性的提出完善不当解雇保护的建议,希望对我国不当解雇保护制度的建设有一定的促进作用。本文共分为四个部分:第一部分是对不当解雇保护的理论分析,首先是对不当解雇概念的界定,因我国《劳动法》和《劳动合同法》都未采解雇一词,因此在对不当解雇概念进行界定时需要对一些基本相关概念进行辨析,比如“雇主”和“用人单位”、“解雇”和“用人单位单方解除劳动合同”、“解雇”和“不当解雇”等,此间会借鉴到国内外立法对其的界定以及学界对其的认识观点等。此外,对解雇保护的相关学说进行探析以期对不当解雇保护制度提供法理支撑。最后在此基础上论及不当解雇保护的必要性。此部分侧重于对不当解雇的理论探析,原因在于明确概念以及学说历史发展,溯及源头的研究可以为该制度的国内外发展现状的比较以及制度完善提供可供参考的坐标。第二部分是对不当解雇保护的比较法考察,主要从两个方面即不当解雇的认定和不当解雇保护措施或法律救济措施对主要工业化国家(德、美、英、法、日)进行比较分析和介绍,并对各国不当解雇认定以及不当解雇保护的立法进行总结归纳出各自的特点,例如英美法系国家中的代表美国因其奉行解雇自由而将不当解雇认定为解雇自由的例外于立法以及司法实践中予以规定。但不论是奉行解雇自由说的美国还是奉行解雇正当事由说的德国,其对雇主的不当解雇行为都有一定的限制措施可供我国借鉴参考,比如大量较为完备的针对不当解雇保护的立法以及其中所规定的系统且明确的不当解雇的程序性以及实体性的规定,尤其是其立法中对正当解雇事由的“合理”、“正当”且具备“社会正当性”的规定值得仔细比较研究。第三部分是对我国现行劳动法律对不当解雇保护的规定以及不足之处的分析和认定,也从不当解雇的认定以及不当解雇保护或法律救济的规定两方面予以介绍,由我国《劳动法》和《劳动合同法》中对不当解雇的认定可知,我国将用人单位单方解除劳动合同分为即时解除、预告解除和经济性裁员三种,不同于国际上所普遍接纳采用的对不当解雇的认定视为概括性不具备合理正当的解雇事由,我国对用人单位单方解除劳动合同的情形都是以法定列举的方式限定其解雇权行使范围,由此造成用人单位解雇范围规定过于狭隘的不足且此外立法缺乏对反社会性和报复性解雇的规定。在不当解雇保护方面,我国《劳动法》和《劳动合同法》对不当解雇仅规定了“继续履行劳动合同”和“经济赔偿”两种法律救济措施,而且并不区分不同类型的不当解雇统一对其进行适用,对劳动合同不能继续履行的适用条件如何也没有明确的条文可供遵循,而经济性赔偿金的计算方式也是基于经济补偿金而与被解雇劳动者的实际损失没有直接关联性,由此造成在不当解雇最终被认定之前的此段期间内被解雇劳动者的经济损失没有得到法律救济,此外工会以及劳动行政部门在不当解雇救济中所发挥的监督作用也较为有限。第四部分是在第三部分的基础上针对性提出完善我国不当解雇保护的建议,此部分也有对第二部分国外立法经验的借鉴,在不当解雇认定方面建议于立法上明确不当解雇的涵义和具体类型,在对不当解雇的保护措施上提出五种完善建议,首先对不同类型的不当解雇进行区分以有针对性的适用法律救济措施,例如对解雇程序的违反和对解雇事由的违反所造成的实际损害因存在较大差距而应优先选择适用继续履行劳动合同或经济赔偿的救济措施;再则对继续履行劳动合同的标准予以立法明确,综合不当解雇中双方对复职的主观意愿、被解雇劳动者的过错程度、双方信赖关系能否维持以及对雇主商业利益与被解雇劳动者利益衡量等较为切实可行的因素作为参考标准;此外建议重构经济赔偿金的计算方式,建议以劳动者的实际损失为参考计算标准而不是单纯以经济补偿金为依据;另外本文建议借鉴国外对反社会不当解雇保护的立法以弥补目前我国对此处不当解雇的法律空白;最后是增强工会和劳动行政机构在不当解雇保护中应具备的对被解雇劳动者的保护作用,主要是强化其监督权的行使。更多还原

【Abstract】 Dismissal is related to workers’ right to work and the most basic right to subsistence.Its important position in the labor relationship is self-evident.Abuse or improper exercise of the right to dismiss will make it inherently vulnerable in labor relations.It is difficult to protect the basic rights and interests of workers,and the loss of personal interests will affect the balance and harmony and stability of the entire society to a certain extent.Therefore,the theory of dismissal development follows the requirements of the times and has developed from the initial freedom of dismissal to the present.The justification is that countries are beginning to show in their legislation restrictions on improper dismissal and legal relief and protection of employees who have suffered improper dismissal.In contrast,China’s "Labor Law" and "Labor Contract Law",due to the combined effect of various factors,have not only failed to adopt the term of inappropriate dismissal,but also unilaterally terminated the employment contract with fewer provisions in the legislation on unilateral termination of the employment contract by the employer.The right to a labor contract is less restricted and is different from the connotation of improper dismissal that is generally adopted internationally.China enumerates legally the cases in which an employer unilaterally terminates a labor contract.Therefore,the academic community has the right to dismiss an employer in China.The strength of restrictions has been debated.Therefore,this article starts with the definition of the concept of improper dismissal.While in-depth analysis of the legal basis for the protection of improper dismissal,it also draws lessons from countries with more comprehensive or advanced international legislation or practice in the protection of improper dismissal.Britain,France and Japan are the representatives.On the basis of this,we can compare and find the lack of identification and protection of improper dismissal in China’s labor laws and regulations,and put forward suggestions to improve the protection of improper dismissal.Certain promotion effect.This article is divided into four parts:The first part is a theoretical analysis of the protection of improper dismissal.The first is the definition of the concept of improper dismissal.Since neither the "Labor Law" nor the "Labor Contract Law" adopted the term dismissal,it is necessary to define the concept of improper dismissal.Discuss some basic related concepts,such as "employer" and "employer","dismissal" and "unilateral termination of employment contract by the employer","dismissal" and "improper dismissal",etc.Here we will learn from domestic and foreign legislation on the Definition and academic views on it.In addition,the related doctrines of dismissal protection are analyzed to provide legal support for the improper dismissal protection system.Finally,the necessity of improper dismissal protection is discussed on this basis.This part focuses on the theoretical analysis of improper dismissal,because the concept and historical development of the doctrine are clarified.The research that traces back to the source can provide reference coordinates for the comparison of the development status of the system at home and abroad and the improvement of the system.The second part is a comparative law review of the protection of improper dismissal.It mainly analyzes the major industrialized countries(Germany,the United States,the United Kingdom,France,Japan)from two aspects,namely,the identification of improper dismissal and the protection measures or legal relief measures.And introduced and summarized the legislation of improper dismissal and protection of improper dismissal in each country and summarized their respective characteristics.For example,the representative of the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and the United States and France,the United States and the United States,because of the pursuit of freedom of dismissal.It is regulated in judicial practice.However,whether it is to pursue freedom of dismissal in Germany or the United States,or Germany in pursuance of justification for dismissal,there are certain restrictions on improper dismissal of employers for reference in our country,such as a large number of more comprehensive legislation on improper dismissal protection and The systematic and clear procedural and substantive provisions of improper dismissal,especially the "reasonable","legitimate" and "socially justifiable" provisions of the law on the grounds for proper dismissal deserve careful comparison.The third part is the analysis and determination of the provisions of China’scurrent labor law on the protection of improper dismissal and its deficiencies.It also introduces the identification of improper dismissal and the provisions of protection or legal relief of improper dismissal."And the" Labor Contract Law "for the identification of improper dismissal,China’s classification of employers unilateral termination of labor contracts into immediate termination,notice of termination and economic layoffs,different from the internationally accepted improper dismissal.It is deemed to be general and does not have a reasonable and reasonable ground for dismissal.In the case of unilateral termination of the employment contract by the employer in China,the scope of the exercise of the right to dismiss is limited by the statutory enumeration.As a result,the scope of the dismissal of the employer is too narrow.In addition,legislation lacks provisions for anti-social and retaliatory dismissals.In terms of protection against improper dismissal,China’s "Labor Law"and "Labor Contract Law" only provide for two types of legal relief measures,"continuing to perform a labor contract" and "economic compensation",and do not distinguish between different types of improper dismissal.Applying it,there are no clear provisions on the applicable conditions for which labor contracts cannot continue to be performed,and the method of calculating economic compensation is also based on economic compensation and has no direct correlation with the actual loss of the fired worker.As a result,there is no legal remedy for the economic loss of the fired workers during this period before the improper dismissal is finally determined.In addition,the supervisory role played by the labor union and the labor administration in the improper dismissal relief is also limited.The fourth part is based on the third part,and puts forward suggestions to improve the protection of improper dismissal in China.This part also draws on the second part of the foreign legislative experience.In terms of the identification of improper dismissal,it is recommended that the meaning and For specific types,five suggestions are made for protection against improper dismissal.First,different types of improper dismissals are differentiated to apply targeted legal remedies,such as violations of the termination procedure and violations of the cause of termination.Due to the large gap,the actual damage should be given priority to apply the relief measures to continue to perform the labor contract or economic compensation;then the standards for continuing to perform the labor contract should be legislated and cleared,and the subjective willingness of both parties to reinstatement and dismissal in the case of improper dismissal.The laborer ’s fault,whether the relationship of trustbetween the two parties can be maintained,and more practical factors such as the employer ’s commercial interest and the measurement of the dismissed laborer ’s benefits are taken as reference standards.In addition,it is recommended that the calculation method of economic compensation be restructured.The actual loss is a reference calculation standard instead of a single It is based on economic compensation;in addition,this article proposes to draw on foreign legislation on anti-social improper dismissal protection to make up for the current legal gap in China for improper dismissal.Finally,it is necessary to strengthen the countermeasures that trade unions and labor administrative institutions should have in improper dismissal protection.The protective role of laid-off workers is mainly to strengthen the exercise of their supervisory power.更多还原