| 摘要: | 促進團體協商是經濟性罷工之主要目的。新團體協約法於 2008 年修正通過， 2011 年 5 月 1 日正式施行，其中第 6 條正式引進外國法上誠信協商義務之概念， 亦同步要求勞資雙方。但是，依據勞資爭議處理法而發動罷工的工會，應否於罷工標的、手段與程序中遵守團體協約法上誠信協商義務、違反者效果如何，不無疑問。本文欲透過觀察美國法多年來工會誠信協商義務與不受保護的活動概念之發展，作為我國對於工會不誠信協商行為與罷工規範之借鏡。據此，本研究進行步驟有五，依序為:介紹研究背景、說明研究目的與任務、描述兩國制度、比較 兩國制度異同、考察美國法對我國的啟發、通盤提出建議。
本文共有六章，第一章說明本研究之背景、動機、目的、範圍及研究方法， 並架構全文寫作綱要;第二章及第三章分別描述與分析美國與我國對於工會誠信協商義務之相關規範及其特色與內涵、工會罷工受到的規範與限制;第四章逐項比較美國法與我國法，劃分出工會誠信協商義務、經濟性罷工之合法性規範、工 會誠信協商義務與罷工合法性規範上之關聯;提出並列舉在美國美國規範與實務 的啟發下，我國法在工會不誠信行為與罷工規範下有待回應的問題架構;繼而嘗試在合乎我國法的脈絡下，於第五章分析 NLRA 所定之工會誠信協商義務與不受保護的活動概念，在我國既有勞動三法下的適用空間與潛在解釋方向，並就實定法尚無法回應或者通盤檢討下有所不妥之處，提出相關立法上的建議。最末，就 本研究之發現與建議於第六章進行成果歸納。
To promote collective bargaining is the main purpose of an economic strike . The new Collective Agreement Act, which has been modified in 2008, has come into force since May, 1, 2011. Article 6 of the Act introduced the concept of the duty to bargain in good faith, and required both labor and management to follow. However, when unions go on a strike under the Act for Settlement of Labor Disputes, should it comply with the duty of bargaining in good faith for their sobjects , methods and procedures of the strike ? What’s the legal effect of the violator?
This study observe the development of the concept of the “duty to bargain in good faith” and “unprotected activities” of US laws, as a reference for bad faith conduct and strike regulations in Taiwan. The paper based on five steps: introducing the research background, explaining research goals and tasks, describing the institution of the two countries, comparing the similarities and differences between the institution of the two countries, examine the law perpective we can learn from US , and make overall recommendations.
There are six chapters in this study. Chapter 1, the paper explains the background, motivation, goal , scope, methods and outline of this study; union‘s duty to bargain in good faith, the legal requirements for the institution of lawful strike and their relevance in two countries, are described and analyzed in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3. Then, Chapter 4, the paper compares the institution in two contries and structure the problem of Tawain law from US law perpective. For resolving these problems in the legal interpretation and legislation , Chapter 5, the paper try to analyze how the concept of “union’s duty to bargain in good faith” and “unprotected activities” in NLRA may apply to Taiwan law. Finally, the findings and suggestions of this research are summarized in Chapter 6. |
