本文選題：勞動法領域 + 意思自治��； 參考：《吉林大學》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：意思自治原則曾被早期勞動法廣泛適用�，F(xiàn)代勞動法兼具公法和私法屬性,意思自治與國家管制并存,在現(xiàn)有勞動法律未明確規(guī)定意思自治原則適用條件和范圍的前提下,在多大程度上尊重用人單位與勞動者的意思自治是個有爭議的問題。人民法院在審理勞動爭議案件的過程中無可避免地要對用人單位與勞動者簽訂的各種協(xié)議的效力進行評判,現(xiàn)有勞動法律法規(guī)以大量“不得”、“應當”等強制性用語約束用人單位與勞動者的“自治”行為,對于用人單位與勞動者可自由協(xié)商的事項和內容卻未予以概括和明確,使各地勞動仲裁機構和法院在審查協(xié)議效力時缺乏全國性的原則標準。各地對于同種協(xié)議的效力認定存在不同的做法,用人單位和勞動者在不同地域遇到的裁判結果可能截然相反,這種現(xiàn)象的存在會損害司法權威,也妨礙勞動市場的良性運轉�！秳趧雍贤ā穼嵤┌四暌詠�,經濟環(huán)境和用工環(huán)境已經發(fā)生了極大的變化。隨著全國范圍內各地域經濟總體發(fā)展水平的提高和人口老齡化的提前到來,原來供大于求的勞動力市場已經逐漸向供需平衡轉變,對外來工需求較大的某些經濟發(fā)達地區(qū)甚至經常出現(xiàn)“用工荒”的現(xiàn)象,勞動者享有比原先更多的擇業(yè)自由。經過《勞動合同法》出臺之初幾年勞動爭議訴訟爆炸的洗禮,再加上多年來的法治建設和法制宣傳取得的卓越成果,勞動者的維權能力也得到了普遍的提高�？紤]到這些背景因素的出現(xiàn),國家在勞動關系領域干預的范圍和程度也有必要隨之調整。任何法律都有其保護的利益和限制權利行使的邊界,有必要確定意思自治原則在勞動法領域的適用范圍。在勞動爭議案件中要避免破壞用人單位與勞動者的契約自由,就必須對法律條文進行準確解讀,把握立法原意,將法律規(guī)定、雙方協(xié)議涉及的事項、利益的分配三者結合起來分析。筆者以自己審判實踐中的眾多典型案例來闡釋哪些情形的協(xié)議僅因違反管理性強制性規(guī)定而有效,哪些情形的協(xié)議會因違反效力性強制性規(guī)定而無效,哪些情形的協(xié)議因未損害國家利益、社會公共利益、勞動者基本權益和未違反公序良俗而有效,以此來說明意思自治原則在勞動法領域的廣泛適用。通過對大量相關案例進行分析,筆者認為,從勞動法律保護的利益和勞動爭議處理的事項范圍考慮,對于用人單位與勞動者“自治”協(xié)議的有效情形,可明確規(guī)定:用人單位與勞動者以訂立、履行、終止或解除勞動合同為目的,基于雙方真實意思表示達成的未損害國家利益、社會公共利益、勞動者基本權益和未違反公序良俗的協(xié)議有效。
[Abstract]:The principle of will autonomy was widely applied in early labor laws. The modern labor law has the attributes of public law and private law, and the autonomy of will coexists with the control of the state. Under the premise that the principle of autonomy of will is not clearly stipulated in the existing labor law, The degree of respect for the autonomy of employers and workers is a controversial issue. In the process of handling labor dispute cases, the people's courts inevitably have to judge the effectiveness of various agreements signed between the employing units and the laborer, and the existing labor laws and regulations are "not allowed" in a large number of cases. Compulsory terms such as "shall" restrict the act of "autonomy" between the employer and the laborer, but the matters and contents of which the employer and the laborer can freely negotiate have not been summarized and made clear. Causes the local labor arbitration institution and the court to examine the agreement validity lacks the national principle standard. There are different practices in different places regarding the validity of the same agreement. The judicial results encountered by employers and workers in different regions may be quite the opposite, and the existence of this phenomenon will undermine the judicial authority. It also hinders the healthy operation of the labor market. Since the implementation of the Labor contract Law eight years ago, the economic environment and the employment environment have undergone great changes. With the improvement of the overall level of economic development in various regions throughout the country and the early arrival of an aging population, the labor market, which was oversupplied and oversupplied, has gradually shifted to a balance between supply and demand. In some economically developed areas where the demand for foreign workers is greater, the phenomenon of "shortage of employment" often occurs, and workers enjoy more freedom to choose their jobs than before. After the baptism of labor dispute litigation explosion in the early years of the "Labor contract Law", plus the remarkable achievements in the construction of the rule of law and the legal propaganda over the years, the workers' ability to safeguard their rights has also been generally improved. Considering the emergence of these background factors, the scope and extent of state intervention in the field of labor relations should be adjusted accordingly. Any law has its protected interests and limits on the exercise of rights. It is necessary to determine the scope of application of the principle of autonomy of will in the field of labor law. In order to avoid undermining the freedom of contract between the employer and the laborer in labor dispute cases, we must accurately interpret the legal provisions, grasp the legislative intent, and stipulate the law and the matters involved in the agreement between the two sides. The distribution of benefits is combined with analysis. The author uses many typical cases in his own trial practice to explain which cases the agreement is valid only because of the violation of the mandatory regulations of management, and which cases of the agreement will be invalid because of the breach of the mandatory provisions of validity. In which cases the agreement is effective because it does not harm the national interest, the social public interest, the basic rights and interests of the laborer, and does not violate the public order and good custom, so as to explain the extensive application of the principle of autonomy of will in the field of labor law. Through the analysis of a large number of relevant cases, the author believes that considering the interests of labor law protection and the scope of labor dispute settlement, the effective situation of the agreement between employer and laborer is "autonomy". It may be clearly stipulated that the employer and the laborer, for the purpose of concluding, fulfilling, terminating or terminating a labor contract, have reached without prejudice to the interests of the state and the public interest on the basis of the expression of the true will of both parties, The basic rights and interests of the laborer and the agreement which does not violate the public order and good custom are valid.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D922.52

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 劉敏,潘醒;意思自治原則的經濟分析[J];甘肅政法學院學報;2005年04期

2 劉萍;意思自治原則在中國的適用問題[J];理論導刊;2000年11期

3 劉秀芳,胡蓉;從意思自治原則的發(fā)展歷程看自由和秩序的互動關系[J];當代法學;2002年11期

4 汪粼;;淺論意思自治原則及其運用[J];湖北農村金融研究;2003年11期

5 謝龍;汪飛騰;;淺析意思自治原則及其實現(xiàn)[J];科教文匯(下旬刊);2008年11期

6 崔艷玲;;論意思自治原則確定《聯(lián)合國國際貨物銷售合同公約》的適用[J];哈爾濱學院學報;2008年09期

7 邱四鋒;;從意思自治原則看壟斷經濟的違法性[J];科技信息;2009年17期

8 王剛;;意思自治原則在《國際商事合同通則》中的適用[J];鄭州航空工業(yè)管理學院學報(社會科學版);2010年06期

9 王岳;;反思意思自治原則在急危病癥搶救中的尷尬[J];中國衛(wèi)生法制;2011年01期

10 劉洋;劉剛;;侵權沖突法中意思自治原則的比較研究[J];中國外資;2011年14期

相關會議論文 前1條

1 王永亮;;論意思自治原則在新合同法中的體現(xiàn)[A];中國民商法實務論壇論文集[C];2005年

相關重要報紙文章 前6條

1 劉新榮;意思自治原則的適用[N];江蘇經濟報;2013年

2 徐國棟 廈門大學法學院;反思意思自治原則[N];中國社會科學報;2010年

3 張友芹;意思自治原則在民事活動中的運用[N];人民法院報;2001年

4 廣東經天律師事務所律師 鄭名偉;誠實信用與意思自治原則一場PK[N];證券時報;2013年

5 武漢大學法學院博士生 范姣艷;我國涉外勞動合同中意思自治原則的適用[N];人民法院報;2006年

6 李曉鋒 胡曉暉;意思自治原則是民事行為效力認定的基本原則[N];西部法制報;2014年

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 高宇;理念·功能·技術：意思自治原則的伸展與評鑒[D];吉林大學;2007年

相關碩士學位論文 前10條

1 趙靖;我國夫妻財產制中的意思自治原則[D];山西大學;2015年

2 徐悅;論我國涉外一般侵權案件中的意思自治原則[D];華東政法大學;2015年

3 朱玉瑾;論意思自治原則在涉外親屬關系中的適用[D];蘇州大學;2016年

4 陳堯;論涉外物權法律適用中的意思自治原則[D];華中師范大學;2016年

5 胡勝盛;論意思自治原則在網絡國際私法中的適用[D];華中師范大學;2016年

6 沈炬;意思自治原則在勞動法領域的適用[D];吉林大學;2016年

7 黃昱豪;可變更、可撤銷合同范圍的研究[D];南昌大學;2016年

8 鄭弼勇;試論涉外侵權法律適用中的意思自治原則[D];中國政法大學;2008年

9 馬俐霞;論意思自治原則的價值性與實踐[D];中國政法大學;2005年

10 王艷;論意思自治原則在離婚法律適用中的發(fā)展[D];中國政法大學;2006年

，

本文編號：1862769