【作者】 何晓坚；

【导师】 池子华；

【作者基本信息】 苏州大学 ， 中国近现代史， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 本文以苏南为中心,对近代农民工待遇问题进行较为系统考察,认为农民工待遇包括物质待遇、精神待遇和社会待遇三个方面。物质待遇主要包括工资、福利两部分。影响农民工工资的因素具有“多重性”,其中“技术”因子至关重要,技能等级越高获取较高工资的主动性越强;物价的波动起伏,造成农民工实际工资的不稳定;名目繁多的克扣及拖欠也让农民工的工资难以完全兑现,“折扣”工资使其生活质量难以提高。近代农民工福利状况不佳,衣食住行用等基本生活设施缺乏,不过消费合作社作为一项福利设施,对农民工应对物价上涨、改善物质待遇不无小补。近代农民工的精神待遇不能尽如人意,主要表现在农民工基本的精神需要得不到满足甚至被扭曲,在职业发展上所能获得的精神支持不力,而其人格自立状况也不容乐观。首先,农民工基本精神需要得不到充分满足,恋家情结的消解存在诸多限制因素;闲暇需要没能引起资方和社会的足够重视,可资利用的休闲设施极为有限;心理问题缺乏疏导机制,农民工虽然通过“后台”、“前台”的举动来宣泄不满,但不能从根本上解决矛盾,宣泄心理无法得到根本化解。其次,农民工获得职业发展的精神支持有限,“劳工教育”并不为多数农民工及其子女所享有,而面临着“供给上的”和“本身的”两难。再次,农民工人格自立状况堪忧,其自主性在生存压力下降低,对“物”的依赖性增强,甚至承受各种侮辱、苛责;农民工观念的开放性不足,对外部世界的认知有限,但已经注意利用舆论发出声音;由农而工,农民工守时惜时观念内化困难,但通过惩罚和奖励,原有的散漫时间观逐渐在再社会化过程中被守时惜时观念取代。社会待遇包括国民待遇和社会地位两个方面。农民工国民待遇薄弱:低工资使其生存权受到侵蚀;职业卫生及医疗保障状况不佳使其健康权难以保障;缺乏政治参与意识及“代言人”,基本权益保障无法实现,而国家、资方国民待遇意识淡薄,不能提供强有力的支持。农民工的社会地位即在社会关系空间中农民工所处的相对位置以及围绕这一位置所形成的权利义务关系,其中与资方的相对位置主要体现了其社会地位的实态。虽然农民工凭借团结的力量并在第三方的支持下开始向资方的“前台”地位发出挑战,但是资方并不会轻易让渡权利。农民工争取与资方平等的话语权、维护自身权益的过程中,政府显然扮演着至关重要的角色。民国时期出台了许多保护农民工权益的法律法规,表明农民工社会地位的提高,但未能落到实处;内部纷争——学徒、非工会会员被会员排挤——使农民工社会地位提高具有局限性。此外,社会地位和国民待遇关系密切,国民待遇的获得制约社会地位,社会地位的提高有利于国民待遇的获得。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation makes Modern Sunan as the centre to conduct a more systematic study of the treatment of migrant workers, including material treatment、psychological treatment and social treatment of three aspects. Material benefits include wages and benefits in two parts. The factors that affected the wages of migrant workers had a "multiplicity", which "technology" factor was essential, those who had higher level skills can earn higher wages; price fluctuations led to the instability in real wages of migrant workers; the wages can not be completely fulfilled because of numerous deductions and arrears, "discount" wages made it difficult to improve the quality of life. Welfare of migrant workers was in poor condition and lack of basic necessities, but the consumer cooperatives as a welfare helped them cope with rising prices and improve the treatment.The psychological treatment could not be satisfactory, mainly the basic spiritual needs could not be met or even distorted, the development in profession could not be totally supported, and the personality self-reliance could not be optimistic. The basic spiritual needs were not fully met, which made them even love home more. Their leisure needs did not cause attention, which made the available leisure facilities extremely limited. Although the adoption of the "back", "front" of the move to air their grievances, the psychological problems could not be resolved fundamentally. As the development in profession could not be totally supported, the migrant workers and their children could not freely get the“labor education”, while facing the "supply" and "own" dilemma. The personality self-reliance could not be optimistic, which reduced their autonomy to survival mainly on the "objects", even subjected to various insults and blame. The awareness to the outside world was limited, but they also gave a voice through the media in attention. From farmers to workers, the concept of punctuality can be gradually replaced by punishment and reward.Social treatment includes national treatment and social status of two aspects. Weakness of national treatment made them low wages, and had to struggle for survival; occupational health and medical welfare in poor condition made it difficult to guarantee the right to health; the lack of political awareness and participation in an "avocation" to protect the basic rights can not be achieved, and the state and the employers did not give support also. The migrant workers in the space of social relations relatively and the rights and obligations primarily reflected the real state of their social status. While the migrant workers challenged to the "front" position by their union and a third party, but it would not easily alienate the rights of employers. The government obviously played a crucial role on their striving for an equal right and protecting their interests. The Republic of China promulgated a number of laws and regulations to protect their rights and interests, but failed to implement; the internal strife -- apprenticeships, non-union members were marginalized -- limited the social status to improve. In addition, social status and national treatment was related closely, accession to national treatment restricted their social status, while social status was conducive to the improvement of the accession to national treatment.更多还原