【作者】 王黎黎；

【导师】 辜明安；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 经济法， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 集体劳动关系的法律调整,是我国劳动关系调整的新重心。工资集体协商,则是我国调整集体劳动关系,防治集体劳动争议的策略选择。在工资集体协商如火如荼开展的同时,却出现了令人深思的矛盾现象：立法规定难以落实,而制度实践中的实际规则往往与立法规则不一致。一方面,工资集体协商形式化现象严重,很多集体合同是地方官员应对上级政绩考核的形式化手段,而没有依照立法中协商双方意见交换的具体规定。另一方面,2010南海本田工资集体协商、温岭羊毛衫行业的工资集体协商等成功案例,并未遵循制度的法定步骤,却有效化解了劳动争议,增加了收入分配的合理性。那么,工资集体协商实际规则与立法规定存在哪些差异,其说明我国集体劳动关系调整的实际模式与立法策略有怎样的区别?研究这一问题,可以弥补目前理论研究的不足,为立法完善提供参考。工资集体协商立法所遵循的集体劳动关系调整的立法模式为“协约自治”,即由职工方与企业方自主决定劳动条件,并予以实施。实践中,启动协商程序的主要因素,是政府推行与职工诉求,而非立法追求的企业工会倡导；协商商谈过程,表现为政府主导或企业统合两种情况,而非立法追求的职工方与企业方平等商谈；协议审查中,政府超负荷的工作量由地方总工会巧妙分担,而非立法规定的政府单独负责协议的效力确保工作；协议履行阶段,政府、地方总工会分别开展的灵活多样的评比、巡视活动,激励和督促了集体协议的履行,而非立法规定由劳资相互监督和劳动监察作为履行监督机制。所以,工资集体协商实践反映的集体劳动关系调整的实际模式为“统合协作”,即政府统筹治理,职工方、企业方、地方总工会三方协同合作的“一方统合,三方协作”的模式。这种新型调整模式的出现,是由于我国正在经历由“国家统合”向“协约自治”过渡的劳动法制模式转换,而引起的正常现象。第一章“协约自治：集体劳动关系调整的立法模式”,通过分析工资集体协商立法,研究集体劳动关系调整的立法模式。为后续章节的研究提供逻辑基础。“协约自治”是工资集体协商立法,所反映的集体劳动关系调整的立法模式。在此模式之下,制度旨在实现协调劳资关系、形成和完善工资决定机制和增长机制、劳资合作与劳资共赢三大功能；制度以产业关系学派和人力资源管理学派相结合的思想作为理论依据；立法对职工、工会、职工代表大会或全体职工大会、企业、政府劳动保障行政部门、地方总工会各角色之间的法律关系都进行了明确定位；工资集体协商的法定程序分为筹备启动、协商商谈、协议审查、协议履行四个阶段。第二章“政府推行与职工诉求：工资集体协商的启动”,围绕筹备启动阶段,实际规则与立法规定的异同展开研究。在启动模式上,立法以合作主义下的工会启动为追求,而实践中却呈现合作主义与多元主义并存的现象；在筹备启动步骤的顺序、职工方协商代表的产生过程、协商合意的达成过程中实践规则与立法规定都存在差异。立法倡导工会启动协商,实践中启动协商的真实诱因是政府推行与职工诉求。这些差异是由于“治理策略的单一化无法对接劳动关系的多样化”造成的。第三章“政府主导与企业统合：工资的集体协商”,围绕协商商谈阶段,实际规则与立法规定的异同展开研究。立法追求在商谈中采用协约自治之制衡模式,但实践却呈现帮扶下的协约自治、协同模式、企业统合模式三种形式；在协商会议的规则、协商双方权利义务、协商内容、协议草案的审议中,实践与立法都存在偏差。立法追求的商谈过程劳资自治,实践中商谈过程由政府主导,或者企业单方控制。而这些偏差可以由“强制性制度变迁因素的不足与诱导性制度变迁因素的欠缺”进行解释。第四章“政府超负与工会替补：工资集体协议的审查”,围绕协议审查阶段,实际规则与立法规定的异同展开研究。立法遵照“合法性为基础的认可制”,依靠政府部门的审查权确保工资集体协议的效力；实践中,政府的审查工作繁重,工作量超负荷,工作质量堪忧,而地方总工会的预审制度则巧妙分担了政府的工作。实践与立法的偏差,可以通过法律“所倡导的变迁应该参照那些与其有相似的人口特征并且法律在变迁中已经起到作用的地区或国家”,和“法律执行者自身必须投入到法律所欲谋求的变革之中”这两项法律成功推动社会变迁的条件的欠缺,予以解释。第五章“政府激励与工会督促：工资集体协议的履行”,围绕协议履行阶段,实际规则与立法规定的异同展开研究。协议履行阶段立法,旨在确保工资集体协议的规范性效力,以劳资双方相互监督和政府的劳动监察实施协议履行的监督,并规定了集体协议的违约责任。而实践表明,工资集体协议除了规范性效力之外,还具有债权性内容；政府、地方总工会开展的评比、巡视等灵活多样的激励活动,是督促协议履行的主要方式；法定违约责任运用极少。实践与立法的偏差可以解释为：“协议履行主要体现为一种人力资源管理方式”。第六章“统合协作：集体劳动关系调整的实践模式”,总结工资集体协商实践所反映的集体劳动关系调整的实际模式。基于以上章节的研究,并通过制度功能、理论依据、法律关系的宏观构架、法定程序划分的实践与立法对比,可以得出：“统合协作”是工资集体协商实践,所反映的集体劳动关系调整的实际模式。政府对劳动关系统筹治理,政府态度既追求“回避”又延续“干预”；职工方、企业方、地方总工会三方协同合作,劳资双方既追求“自治”又依赖“强制”,地方总工会成为集体劳动关系调整的重要角色。即“一方统合,三方协作”。这一新型调整模式的出现,是由于我国正在经历由“国家统合”向“协约自治”过渡的劳动法制模式转换,而引起的正常现象。本文创新点如下：第一,在研究方法上,以我国立法为参照进行实际规则的研究,突破了目前研究以国外理论和国外制度为参照,研究结果难以借鉴于立法完善的不足。第二,提出了集体劳动关系法律调整的新概念“统合协作”。弥补了理论研究的不足,并为立法完善提出了框架性的建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Collective wage consultation, achieved the transition from adjusting individual labor relations to adjusting collective labor relations, is a strategy selection in our country for preventing and resolving collective labor disputes which are relevant to the remuneration of labor. At the same time that the collective wage consultation is launching in full swing, there appears a contradictory phenomenon that makes one ponder, namely the law-making stipulation is hard to be implemented while the actual rules in institutional practice are always disaccord with the legislative rules. On one hand, the collective wage consultation has a serious phenomenon of going through the formality. A great many of the collective agreements are the formalized means for local officials to deal with the government performance examination from high above and are not in line with the specific provisions in the legislation about the exchange of views between the two sides in a bargaining. On the other hand, some successful cases, such as the collective wage consultation of Nan Hai Honda in2010, the collective wage consultation of the knitted sweater industry of Wen Ling, do not adhere to the statutory procedures of rules and regulations, but they has effectively resolved these labor disputes and has raised the rationality of income distribution. So, what are the actual rules of collective wage consultation? The current studies do not take the law-making stipulation as a frame of reference, so the author cannot draw on the experience of the legislative improvement. Therefore, this dissertation has narrowed down the research problem as "what are the similarities and differences between the actual rules of collective wage consultation and the law-making stipulation? What differences it indicates in legal and actual adjustment in collective labor relations?" On the premise of a general analysis about the orientation of institutional functions, the theory sources, the framework of legal relationships and the rule of legal procedures for the current legislation of collective wage consultation, this dissertation, with a logical foundation of dividing the legal procedures of collective wage consultation into four stages as preparing for a start-up, consultation and bargaining, certification of the agreement, performance of the agreement, makes a summary about the actual rules in each stage while referring to the legislative rules in each stage. This dissertation also makes a comparison between the legislative rules and the actual rules with its theoretical explanation. At last, it summarizes the actual adjustment of collective labor relations with theoretical explanation.This dissertation finds that:Co-determination, which endows rights of wage determination to employees and employers, is the legal adjustment for collective labor relations by collective wage consultation. In practice, the most significant factors for setting up consultation is the promotion by governments and requirement by employees; governments or employers control the stage of consultation; the work for governments to certificate the collective agreements is actually shares by the local federation of trade unions; the supervision for performance of collective agreements is rating and awarding activities by local governments and the local federation of trade unions. Therefore, Corporatism-Coordination is the actual adjustment for collective labor relations. Corporatism-Coordination is a system in which governments regulates collective labor relations, and employees, employers, and the local federation of trade unions work together to make it true. That is "one party governs, and three parties coordinate". The appearance of Corporatism-Coordination is for the reason that: The legal adjustment for collective labor relations in China is from Corporatism to Co-determination.This dissertation includes the specific contents below:Chapter one, providing a theoretical basis for the study of the following chapters, makes an analysis for the orientation of institutional functions, theory source of legislation, the macro framework of legal relationships, the division of legal procedures, to find out the legal adjustment of collective labor relation. The study of this chapter holds a view that:Co-determination is the legal adjustment for collective labor relations. Collective wage consultation is constructed and shaped during the establishment and improvement of market economic system. Through the combination of agreement autonomous mode, industrial relation mode and human resource management mode, the collective wage consultation system aims to achieve three functions as the coordination of labor relation, the formation and improvement of deciding and increasing mechanism for wages, the cooperation and win-win of labor-capital. The legislation of this system stipulates the specific orientations for legal relationships among various parts like staff and workers, trade union, worker’s congress or all-staff meetings, enterprises, administration department of government for labor security, local federation of trade unions. The legal procedures of collective wage bargaining are divided into four stages as preparing for a start-up, consultation and bargaining, certification of the agreement, performance of the agreement.Chapter two gives an answer to the specific question that "what are the similarities and differences between the actual rules and the law-making stipulation in the stage of preparing for a start-up?" The study of this chapter finds that:For the start-up mode, the legislation pursues a start-up from the trade union under the corporatism, while in practice there appears a phenomenon about the coexistence of the corporatism and the pluralism. There are differences between the actual rules and the law-making stipulation in aspects like the sequence of steps in preparing for a start-up, the forming process of consultation representatives in the staff side, the achieving process of the consensus in a consultation. These differences are caused by that "the simplification of management strategy cannot make a butt joint with the diversification of labour relationship".Chapter three gives an answer to the specific question that "what are the similarities and differences between the actual rules and the law-making stipulation in the stage of consultation and bargaining?" The study of this chapter finds that:The legislation pursues the mode of check and balance for agreement autonomy, while in practice it presents various forms like agreement autonomy by assistance, synergism mode, and integration mode by enterprises. There are differences between the practice and the legislation in aspects like rules of bargaining conference, rights and obligations for both sides in bargaining, bargaining contents, and deliberation of the bargaining drafts. However, these differences can be explained by "the insufficiency of transition factors for compulsory system and the deficiency of transition factors for inductive system". Chapter four gives an answer to the specific question that "what are the similarities and differences between the actual rules and the law-making stipulation in the stage of certification of the agreement?" The study of this chapter finds that:The legislation conforms to "the accreditation system which is based on legitimacy" and it emphasizes the right of examination for government department. In practice, the goal for the examination of legitimacy has not been achieved, while the examination relies on a close cooperation from the local federation of trade unions. However, these differences can be explained by the lack of two considerations for successful social change by law.Chapter five gives an answer to the specific question that "what are the similarities and differences between the actual rules and the law-making stipulation in the stage of performance of the agreement?" The study of this chapter finds that:The legislation conforms to the effect of standardization of collective agreements, supervision systems with the both supervision between employers and employees and supervision from governments, and liabilities for breach collective agreements.In practice, there is effect of obligation other than effect of standardization; the most useful supervision is rating and awarding by local governments and the local federation of trade unions; and rare cases for liabilities for breach collective agreements. However, these differences can be explained by "performance of the collective agreements acts for a method of administration".Chapter six summarizes the actual adjustment for collective labor relations. Through the comparison between actual rules and legal legislation in institutional functions, theory sources, the macro framework of legal relationships, the division of legal procedures of collective wage consultation, this chapter finds that: Corporatism-Coordination is the actual adjustment for collective labor relations. Corporatism-Coordination is a system in which governments regulates collective labor relations, and employees, employers, and the local federation of trade unions work together to make it true. That is "one party governs, and three parties coordinate". The appearance of Corporatism-Coordination is for the reason that: The legal adjustment for collective labor relations in China is from Corporatism to Co-determination.更多还原