本文關(guān)鍵詞： 南非 勞動(dòng)法 關(guān)廠制度 中國勞動(dòng)法　出處：《湘潭大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：在南非，罷工權(quán)是公民的一項(xiàng)基本人權(quán)，為改善勞動(dòng)待遇，一定人數(shù)的勞動(dòng)者可以在勞動(dòng)場所集體停止工作以維護(hù)其各項(xiàng)權(quán)益。但是，當(dāng)勞動(dòng)者通過罷工權(quán)維護(hù)其合法權(quán)益時(shí)，雇主的各項(xiàng)權(quán)益損失卻無法受到保護(hù)。因此，南非在罷工制度的基礎(chǔ)上形成了方便雇主維護(hù)基本權(quán)益的關(guān)廠制度。南非關(guān)廠制度自形成以來，經(jīng)過了逐步發(fā)展和進(jìn)一步完善，已經(jīng)比較成熟。不僅保障了南非勞動(dòng)法律體系的發(fā)展與完善，更值得其他國家學(xué)習(xí)與借鑒。 南非關(guān)廠制度對(duì)合法關(guān)廠的基本條件以及申請(qǐng)和受理的主要程序等都做出了詳細(xì)的規(guī)定，為維護(hù)南非健康的勞資關(guān)系發(fā)展做出了貢獻(xiàn)。但由于關(guān)廠權(quán)是雇主享有的與工人罷工權(quán)相對(duì)的權(quán)利，雇主天然的強(qiáng)勢地位及罷工權(quán)立法中保護(hù)弱者的初衷就使得南非不得不對(duì)雇主的關(guān)廠權(quán)進(jìn)行多方限制，以避免關(guān)廠權(quán)的濫用。當(dāng)合法關(guān)廠被確立時(shí)，對(duì)罷工者的處理就顯得尤為重要。 除合法關(guān)廠之外，，對(duì)于非法關(guān)廠帶來的損失，雇員既可以提起停止雇主關(guān)廠行為的法定程序，也可以要求獲得公平合理的賠償。糾紛解決機(jī)制大致可分為公力救濟(jì)和私力救濟(jì)兩種方式。對(duì)于權(quán)利救濟(jì)模式的選擇，公力救濟(jì)模式在南非更加受到推崇，是南非廣大勞動(dòng)者遇到非法關(guān)廠糾紛時(shí)的主要選擇。南非現(xiàn)行的非法關(guān)廠權(quán)利救濟(jì)途徑分三個(gè)層次進(jìn)行：協(xié)商的方式是勞動(dòng)爭議發(fā)生后當(dāng)事人的首選，當(dāng)事人不愿意協(xié)商或協(xié)商不成的情況下，可以向自己企業(yè)的勞動(dòng)爭議調(diào)解委員會(huì)申請(qǐng)進(jìn)行調(diào)解；調(diào)解不成的情況下可以繼續(xù)向勞動(dòng)爭議仲裁委員會(huì)提交仲裁；在爭議發(fā)生的任何情況下都可以向有管轄權(quán)的勞動(dòng)法院提起上訴，法院的判決是最終判決，雙方當(dāng)事人必須遵守。 南非關(guān)廠制度發(fā)展到現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)形成了比較完善的制度體系，對(duì)中國相關(guān)法律制度的發(fā)展具有重要啟示：首先我國應(yīng)建立健全勞工法律制度，建設(shè)出符合我國現(xiàn)代化發(fā)展的勞動(dòng)法體系；其次我國應(yīng)早日建立起中國特色的罷工法律制度，將罷工行為納入法制軌道；再次應(yīng)實(shí)現(xiàn)集體談判制度的靈活運(yùn)用，增強(qiáng)中國工會(huì)組織的獨(dú)立自主性；最后應(yīng)確立相對(duì)獨(dú)立的勞動(dòng)訴訟制度，以保障中國勞動(dòng)法律制度的貫徹與執(zhí)行。
[Abstract]:In South Africa, the right to strike is a fundamental human right of citizens. In order to improve labour treatment, a certain number of workers may stop working collectively in the workplace in order to safeguard their rights and interests. When workers protect their legitimate rights and interests through the right to strike, the loss of the employer's rights and interests cannot be protected. On the basis of the strike system, South Africa has formed a factory closure system which is convenient for employers to safeguard their basic rights and interests. Since its formation, the South African factory closure system has been gradually developed and further improved. It not only ensures the development and perfection of South Africa's labor law system, but also is worth learning and learning from other countries. The South African factory closure system has made detailed provisions on the basic conditions of lawful factory closure as well as the main procedures for application and acceptance. Contributed to the healthy development of labour relations in South Africa. However, since the right to close factories is a right enjoyed by employers as opposed to the right of workers to strike. The strong position of the employer and the original intention of protecting the weak in the legislation of the right to strike make South Africa have to restrict the employer's right to close the factory in many ways in order to avoid the abuse of the right to close the factory. The handling of the strikers is particularly important. In addition to the legal closure of the plant, the employee may initiate legal proceedings for the cessation of the employer's closure of the plant in the event of losses arising from the illegal closure of the plant. Dispute resolution mechanism can be divided into public relief and private relief. For the right relief mode choice, the public relief model is more respected in South Africa. It is the main choice of South African workers when they encounter illegal factory closure dispute. The current relief ways of illegal factory closure rights in South Africa are divided into three levels: the way of negotiation is the first choice of the parties after the labor dispute. If the parties are unwilling to negotiate or fail to negotiate, they may apply to the labor dispute mediation committee of their own enterprise for mediation; If mediation fails, it may continue to submit to the Labor dispute Arbitration Commission for arbitration; In any event a dispute may be appealed to a competent labor court whose decision is final and subject to compliance by both parties. South African factory closure system has formed a relatively perfect system, which has important implications for the development of China's relevant legal system: first of all, China should establish and improve the labor legal system. To build a labor law system in line with the development of China's modernization; Secondly, our country should establish the strike legal system with Chinese characteristics as soon as possible and bring the strike behavior into the legal orbit; Thirdly, the flexible application of collective bargaining system should be realized, and the independence of China's trade union organizations should be strengthened. Finally, a relatively independent labor litigation system should be established to ensure the implementation and enforcement of China's labor law system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D947.8

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李坤剛;關(guān)于我國勞動(dòng)爭議仲裁兩個(gè)問題的探討[J];安徽大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2000年03期

2 靳學(xué)筠;對(duì)勞動(dòng)爭議案件仲裁前置原則的反思和重構(gòu)[J];法律適用;1999年03期

3 李德齊,袁鐵錚,柳軍;工業(yè)化市場經(jīng)濟(jì)國家勞動(dòng)爭議處理制度比較研究[J];工會(huì)理論與實(shí)踐.中國工運(yùn)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年04期

4 高霖,蘇海剛;對(duì)現(xiàn)行勞動(dòng)爭議處理體制的探討[J];中國勞動(dòng);2000年08期

5 汪君清;我國勞動(dòng)爭議處理體制的重構(gòu)[J];中國勞動(dòng);2001年11期

6 陳新;勞動(dòng)爭議處理體制應(yīng)實(shí)行兩裁終決[J];中國勞動(dòng);2001年12期

7 陳宗利 ,牛琰;淺談勞動(dòng)爭議的處理模式[J];中國勞動(dòng);2002年06期

8 陳金紅;應(yīng)建立“裁審分離”的勞動(dòng)爭議處理體制[J];中國勞動(dòng);2002年06期

9 王全興 ,侯玲玲;我國勞動(dòng)爭議處理體制模式的選擇[J];中國勞動(dòng);2002年08期

10 李勇;關(guān)于調(diào)整和完善勞動(dòng)爭議處理體制的建議[J];中國勞動(dòng);2003年01期

本文編號(hào)：1489807