本文選題：勞動(dòng)法 + 懲罰性賠償�。� 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：伴隨著社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)和文明的發(fā)展,用人單位與勞動(dòng)者之間的關(guān)系得到不斷的磨合,社會(huì)整體的工業(yè)安全形勢(shì)向好的方向發(fā)展,但是各種安全事故造成的損害的數(shù)據(jù)表明形勢(shì)并不容樂(lè)觀,仍然需要加強(qiáng)關(guān)注。懲罰性賠償責(zé)任與傳統(tǒng)民事責(zé)任不同,它違反了民事責(zé)任的公平、平等原則,而且它是針對(duì)具有社會(huì)危害性的行為的一種處罰方式,這種危害行為包括了個(gè)體與社會(huì)的整體利益,而經(jīng)濟(jì)法保護(hù)的就是個(gè)體與社會(huì)整體的增量利益,因此懲罰性賠償具有經(jīng)濟(jì)法屬性。懲罰性賠償因其特殊的屬性與功能在我國(guó)法律制度上得到進(jìn)一步的適用,并且是勞動(dòng)法領(lǐng)域的一項(xiàng)重要的制度,對(duì)于解決我國(guó)目前的安全生產(chǎn)形勢(shì)惡劣與人力資本急需保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀問(wèn)題具有重要意義。懲罰性賠償在勞動(dòng)法領(lǐng)域雖然有所體現(xiàn),但是有些條款所涉及到的懲罰性賠償也只是在適用上的規(guī)定,并沒(méi)有系統(tǒng)的制度性的規(guī)定。因此也就產(chǎn)生了一系列的問(wèn)題,從實(shí)體法上看:沒(méi)有將勞動(dòng)者的生命健康納入到賠償范圍,賠償金的規(guī)定也不具有合理性與威懾性;從程序法上看:行政機(jī)關(guān)處理前置增加了勞動(dòng)者的訴累,證明責(zé)任和證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)完全采取適用民事訴訟程序的要求。懲罰性賠償制度對(duì)于我國(guó)人力資本的保護(hù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)的發(fā)展具有重要意義。在勞動(dòng)法中將懲罰性賠償進(jìn)行制度性確定更有助于其功能的發(fā)揮,主要表現(xiàn)在:在實(shí)體法上明確懲罰性賠償?shù)莫?dú)立的請(qǐng)求權(quán)、進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)大適用范圍到勞動(dòng)者的生命健康方面、充分考慮用人單位的加害行為以及相關(guān)主體的補(bǔ)償這兩個(gè)方面來(lái)完善懲罰性賠償金的范圍、明確賠償金數(shù)額的參考因素來(lái)完善賠償金數(shù)額的確定;在程序法上:取消勞動(dòng)行政部門(mén)的責(zé)令程序,直接賦予勞動(dòng)者訴權(quán)、采取責(zé)任倒置的規(guī)則同時(shí)注意結(jié)合運(yùn)用幾種不同的證明責(zé)任形式、完善懲罰性賠償?shù)奶厥獾淖C明標(biāo)準(zhǔn),結(jié)合我國(guó)的國(guó)情采取折中的“清晰且具有說(shuō)服力”證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
[Abstract]:With the development of social economy and civilization, the relationship between the employer and the laborer has been unceasing running-in, and the overall industrial safety situation of the society is developing in a good direction. But the data on the damage caused by all kinds of safety accidents suggest that the situation is not optimistic and need to be paid more attention. Punitive liability is different from traditional civil liability. It violates the principle of fairness and equality of civil liability, and it is a punishment for socially harmful behavior. This kind of harm behavior includes the whole benefit of individual and society, and the economic law protects the increment benefit of individual and society as a whole, so punitive damages has the attribute of economic law. Punitive damages, because of its special attributes and functions, have been further applied in the legal system of our country, and it is an important system in the field of labor law. It is of great significance to solve the problem of bad production safety situation and human capital in urgent need of protection in our country. Although punitive damages are embodied in the field of labor law, some provisions involve punitive damages only in the application of the provisions, and there is no systematic system of provisions. Therefore, there are a series of problems, from the perspective of substantive law: the life and health of workers have not been brought into the scope of compensation, and the provisions of compensation are not reasonable and deterrent; From the point of view of procedural law: administrative organs deal with the former increase the laborer's burden of action, the burden of proof and the standard of proof completely adopt the requirement of applying civil procedure. Punitive damages system is of great significance to the protection of human capital and the sustainable development of economy. The institutional determination of punitive damages in the labor law is more helpful to play its functions, mainly in the following aspects: clarifying the independent claim right of punitive damages in substantive law, further expanding the scope of application to the life and health of workers, The scope of punitive damages should be improved by considering the harm behavior of the employing unit and the compensation of the relevant subjects, and the reference factors of the amount of compensation should be defined to perfect the determination of the amount of the damages. In the procedural law: cancel the order procedure of the labor administrative department, directly endow the laborer with the right of action, adopt the rule of responsibility inversion and pay attention to the use of several different forms of burden of proof, and perfect the special proof standard of punitive damages. According to the situation of our country, the standard of "clear and persuasive" proof should be adopted.
【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】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 劉焱白;;用人單位懲罰性賠償金的適用研究[J];法商研究;2013年06期

2 王全興;粟瑜;;用人單位違法不訂立書(shū)面勞動(dòng)合同的“二倍工資”條款分析[J];法學(xué);2012年02期

3 孫效敏;;獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)制度與懲罰性賠償制度之爭(zhēng)——評(píng)我國(guó)《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》第47條[J];政治與法律;2010年07期

4 劉焱白;;論勞動(dòng)基準(zhǔn)法中用人單位的懲罰性賠償責(zé)任[J];財(cái)經(jīng)理論與實(shí)踐;2010年03期

5 秦國(guó)榮;;我國(guó)勞動(dòng)爭(zhēng)議解決的法律機(jī)制選擇——對(duì)勞動(dòng)仲裁前置程序的法律批判[J];江海學(xué)刊;2010年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 鄧玉梅;勞動(dòng)法領(lǐng)域的懲罰性賠償研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2015年

2 廖珊;用人單位懲罰性賠償法律問(wèn)題研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2015年

3 李雨蒙;勞動(dòng)合同法的雙倍工資賠償制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

4 劉佩莉;《勞動(dòng)合同法》中懲罰性賠償制度研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

5 劉曉慧;我國(guó)勞動(dòng)法中懲罰性賠償制度研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

6 柯振興;勞動(dòng)合同法的雙倍工資賠償制度[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

7 涂俊;工傷救濟(jì)懲罰性賠償研究[D];四川大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2025773