【摘要】：“保證”前冠以“人事”二字,提示了人事保證相異于普通民商事保證。將民商事領域的保證制度引入勞動人事領域,既因二者的出發(fā)點均是為了降低交易風險故在大框架上應基本相同,又因二者所依從的主法律關系性質不同而在具體規(guī)制上還應有所區(qū)別。人事保證制度在我國歷史上出現過,并存在了相當長一段時間,新中國成立后便長期處于沉寂狀態(tài),近年來隨改革開放及勞動用工關系大量建立而再次得以廣泛運用。自《勞動合同法》頒布施行后,人事保證制度再度處于爭議端口,當下仍或明或暗地為用人單位所運用。與其他國家或地區(qū)有明確規(guī)定不同,我國勞動立法未對人事保證作出明確法律規(guī)制,態(tài)度模糊；審判實務中對其效力認定也不統(tǒng)一,同案不同判的現象時有發(fā)生。為廓清混亂狀態(tài),維護法律適用的統(tǒng)一性,為社會發(fā)展和經濟建設更好發(fā)揮指引作用,有必要在前人的基礎上作進一步的研究論證。 本文以民商事保證為對比,剖析了人事保證制度的內涵構成,對人事保證制度作了正負兩方面的功能分析,從信用危機下的必要性、動機的正當性、現階段不可替代的功能優(yōu)勢、法理基礎上的契合性、對人事保證的理論與制度困境的再反思等方面對我國確立人事保證制度作了合理性分析,并提出了以“契約自由與國家干預相結合,實現三方利益平衡”為重構人事保證制度的指導思想,以期將人事保證制度的積極功能發(fā)揮至最大而將消極作用抑制至最小。以此指導思想為主線,運用比較分析法,借鑒他國經驗,結合本國實際,從保證人資格、保證期間、保證范圍、保證限額、保證方式、三個主體間的權利義務關系、對保證人利益的保護與救濟等各方面對人事保證制度的法律規(guī)制作了具體設想。本文認為：保證人資格應以有代償能力為應然條件而不是實然條件,原則上用人單位不得拒絕勞動者近親屬作為保證人；保證期間從用人單位知道或應當知道其權利受到勞動者侵害時起算,最高不超過一年；保證范圍所涉職務范圍應限于高風險職位、所涉行為范圍應限于勞動者違反忠實義務的行為；保證限額為勞動者自入職以來至賠償事故發(fā)生時的年平均工資之一至三倍；保證方式應限定為一般保證方式；用人單位應盡謹慎管理義務及通知義務,勞動者應盡善良注意義務,以防范、降低保證人承擔保證責任的風險；同時應賦予保證人范圍更為寬廣的先訴抗辯權,不僅在勞動者責任未被追究前可拒絕用人單位的索賠請求外,用人單位還有其他求償方式未用盡的,同樣可拒絕其索賠請求。對于前人未充分關注的勞動者責任,本文認為違反誠信義務的勞動者還應向保證人承擔懲罰性賠償的加重后果。
[Abstract]:"guarantee" is preceded by "personnel", suggesting that personnel guarantee is different from ordinary civil and commercial guarantee. In order to reduce the transaction risk, the guarantee system in the civil and commercial fields should be basically the same in the large framework because the starting point of both is to reduce the transaction risk. Because of the different nature of the principal legal relationship between them, they should be different in specific regulation. The personnel guarantee system appeared in the history of our country and existed for a long time. After the founding of New China, it has been in a state of silence for a long time. In recent years, with the establishment of a large number of labor and employment relations, it has been widely used in recent years. Since the promulgation and implementation of the Labor contract Law, the personnel guarantee system is once again in the dispute port, and is still used by the employer explicitly or implicitly. Different from other countries or regions, the labor legislation of our country has not made clear legal regulation to personnel guarantee, the attitude is vague; the judicial practice is not uniform to its validity, the phenomenon of different judgment in the same case occurs from time to time. In order to clear up the confusion, maintain the unity of the application of the law, and play a guiding role in social development and economic construction, it is necessary to make further research and demonstration on the basis of the predecessors. Based on the comparison of civil and commercial guarantee, this paper analyzes the connotation of the personnel guarantee system, analyzes the positive and negative functions of the personnel guarantee system, and analyzes the necessity of the credit crisis and the legitimacy of the motive. At the present stage, the irreplaceable functional advantages, the conformity on the basis of legal theory, the reconsideration of the theory and system dilemma of personnel assurance, etc., have made a rational analysis on the establishment of personnel guarantee system in our country. It also puts forward the guiding ideology of reconstructing the personnel guarantee system by combining the freedom of contract with the state intervention and realizing the balance of interests among the three parties in order to exert the positive function of the personnel guarantee system to the maximum and restrain the negative function to the minimum. Taking this guiding ideology as the main line, using the comparative analysis method, drawing lessons from the experience of other countries, combining with the reality of our country, from the qualification of the guarantor, the guarantee period, the guarantee scope, the guarantee quota, the way of the guarantee, the relationship between the rights and obligations of the three subjects, This paper conceive the legal regulation of the personnel guarantee system in the aspects of the protection and relief of the guarantor's interests and so on. This paper holds that the surety's qualification should be based on the compensatory ability rather than the actual condition, and in principle, the employer should not refuse the close relatives of the laborer as the guarantor; The guarantee period shall not exceed one year from the time when the employing unit knows or should know that its rights have been infringed upon by the laborer; the scope of the job covered by the guarantee shall be limited to high-risk positions. The scope of the act shall be limited to the act of violating the duty of loyalty of the worker; the guarantee limit shall be one to three times the average annual wage of the worker from the beginning of his employment to the time of the accident of compensation; the mode of guarantee shall be limited to the general mode of guarantee; The unit of choose and employ persons shall exercise the duty of careful management and the obligation of notification, and the laborer shall do his duty of kindness and care in order to prevent and reduce the risk that the guarantor shall bear the responsibility of surety; at the same time, the guarantor shall be given the right to plead in the first suit in a wider scope, The employer may not only refuse the claim of the employer before the liability of the laborer is investigated, but also refuse the claim if the employer has not exhausted any other means of compensation. The author thinks that workers who violate the obligation of good faith should bear the aggravating consequences of punitive damages to the guarantor.
【學位授予單位】：西南財經大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D922.52

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 方曉波;;雇員忠誠險推廣存在的問題與對策[J];商業(yè)時代;2007年31期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 張進銳;人事保證制度研究[D];西南政法大學;2007年

2 陳冬紅;勞動合同保證之否定性研究[D];西南政法大學;2009年

，

本文編號：2226044