本文選題：勞動權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：憲法解釋　出處：《上海交通大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 我國憲法上有關(guān)勞動權(quán)的規(guī)定產(chǎn)生于計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)年代,在當(dāng)今市場經(jīng)濟(jì)體制不斷完善、政治文明逐步演進(jìn)的背景下,亟待根據(jù)現(xiàn)實(shí)的需要,本著保障人權(quán)的基本價(jià)值,對憲法中的相關(guān)條款進(jìn)行重新解釋。勞動權(quán)的憲法解釋起著整合涉及勞動權(quán)的憲法文本、補(bǔ)充相關(guān)的憲法漏洞、保持有關(guān)憲法條款穩(wěn)定性和適應(yīng)性的功能。 對勞動權(quán)的憲法解釋還應(yīng)當(dāng)遵循一定的原則,在這其中,解釋者應(yīng)當(dāng)受到制憲者意圖的約束、憲法精神的約束、客觀的歷史進(jìn)步方向的約束、解釋規(guī)則的約束和解釋者人格的自我約束。 勞動權(quán)的憲法解釋應(yīng)當(dāng)按照法律解釋的一般要求和憲法解釋的特有原則,從文本出發(fā),由近及遠(yuǎn),依次展開文義解釋、歷史解釋、體系解釋、目的解釋。在個(gè)案中,應(yīng)當(dāng)注意各種價(jià)值的平衡,防止出現(xiàn)嚴(yán)重的不公正。 經(jīng)過解釋,我們得出公民沒有法律上的勞動義務(wù),勞動權(quán)的內(nèi)容包括:擇業(yè)自由權(quán)、勞動基準(zhǔn)權(quán)、社會保障權(quán)、就業(yè)保障權(quán)等個(gè)體權(quán)利和交涉權(quán)、談判權(quán)、罷工權(quán)等集體權(quán)利。在這些權(quán)利中,憲法明確規(guī)定的有勞動基準(zhǔn)權(quán)、社會保障權(quán)、就業(yè)保障權(quán),而雖未明示但可補(bǔ)漏的是擇業(yè)自由和集體勞動權(quán)。在個(gè)案中,我們應(yīng)當(dāng)注意勞動權(quán)與其他憲法權(quán)利以及國家權(quán)力之間的平衡。國家立法若要通過一種權(quán)利的犧牲以達(dá)到另外一種權(quán)利的保護(hù),必須負(fù)有憲法上的舉證責(zé)任。勞動平等權(quán)保護(hù)的要義在于不平等對待必須從具體的勞動對象和方式出發(fā),避免出現(xiàn)同等條件,不同等對待。 通過對勞動權(quán)的憲法解釋,我們可以依照解釋的結(jié)論完善相關(guān)立法的解釋、促進(jìn)違憲審查、把握修改和解釋的界限。 本文的主要創(chuàng)新:第一、目前學(xué)界在研究勞動權(quán)的時(shí)候,往往首先給其下定義,至于定義淵源于什么,卻不為研究者所考慮,這種研究背離了構(gòu)建一個(gè)憲政國家的基本前提,即以現(xiàn)行文本為依據(jù)。長此既往,既不有利于構(gòu)建一個(gè)共同交流的理論平臺,也不能指導(dǎo)憲法實(shí)踐。本文力圖擺脫這一思路,從憲法規(guī)范本身出發(fā),綜合運(yùn)用各種解釋手段,一方面保證基本價(jià)值序列的穩(wěn)定,另一方面則最大程度地尋求個(gè)案正義的實(shí)現(xiàn)。第二、在當(dāng)今憲法實(shí)踐中,在學(xué)界最受爭議的除了良性違憲莫過于政策性修憲,本文以為對之不要輕易地加以否定,而應(yīng)當(dāng)將這種現(xiàn)象放在我國社會轉(zhuǎn)型的大背景下考察,最大程度地通過憲法解釋將修憲帶來的新價(jià)值注入既定條款中,最終達(dá)到一種“化腐朽為神奇”的效果。
[Abstract]:The constitution of China on labor rights provisions in the planned economy era, in today's market economy continues to improve, the political civilization under the background of gradual evolution, should be according to the actual needs, in line with the basic values of human rights, re interpretation of the relevant provisions of the constitution. The constitutional interpretation of labor rights plays a constitutional text integration to the right of labor, to supplement the relevant constitutional loopholes, maintain stability and adaptability on the terms of the constitution.
The constitutional interpretation of labor rights should also follow certain principles, in which the interpreter should be constrained by the intention of the constituent, the restraint of the constitution spirit, the restriction of the objective historical progress direction, the constrain of the interpretation rules and the self restriction of the interpreter's personality.
Shall be interpreted in accordance with the general requirements and specific principles of constitutional interpretation of law interpretation of the labor rights of the constitution, starting from the text, from the near to the distant, expand the semantic interpretation, historical interpretation, systematic interpretation, teleological interpretation. In the case, should pay attention to the balance of the various values, prevent serious injustice.
After we explain that citizens have no legal obligations of labor, labor rights include: right, labor rights, social security rights, security of employment rights and individual rights bargaining, bargaining rights, the right to strike and other collective rights. Among these rights, constitutional law clearly stipulates the right of labor standards and the right of social security, employment security right, but did not express but can trap is freedom of choice and collective labor rights. In this case, we should pay attention to labor rights and other constitutional rights and the balance between state power. The protection of national legislation to the right of a sacrifice to another kind of rights. We must bear the burden of proof on the constitution. The essence of equal labor right protection is not equal to from the specific working object and way of avoiding the same conditions, different treatment.
Through the interpretation of the constitution of labor rights, we can improve the interpretation of relevant legislation in accordance with the conclusions of the interpretation, promote the review of unconstitutional, and grasp the limits of the revision and interpretation.
The main innovation of this article: first, when the scholars in the study of labor rights, often the first to the definition, and the definition origin in what was considered, not for researchers, this study deviates from the basic premise to build a constitutional state, the current text as the basis. The long past, neither to establish a theoretical platform for a common exchange, also cannot guide the constitutional practice. This paper tries to get rid of this idea, from the Constitution itself, the integrated use of various means of interpretation, on the one hand to ensure the basic value of sequence stability, on the other hand, the greatest degree for the realization of justice cases. Second, in today's constitutional practice in the academic circles, the most controversial but benign unconstitutionality policy than of constitutional amendment, this thought of don't be negative, but this phenomenon should be put in the background of China's social transformation under investigation, the most To a large extent, the new value brought by the constitution is injected into the established provisions by the constitutional interpretation, and the effect of "decay into magic" is finally achieved.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：D921;D922.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 韓大元,張翔;試論憲法解釋的客觀性與主觀性[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年06期

2 韓大元,張翔;試論憲法解釋的界限[J];法學(xué)評論;2001年01期

3 韓大元;憲法變遷理論評析[J];法學(xué)評論;1997年04期

4 韓大元;林來梵;鄭磊;;憲法解釋學(xué)與規(guī)范憲法學(xué)的對話[J];浙江學(xué)刊;2008年02期

，

本文編號：1671252