【作者】 滕腾；

【导师】 高晋康；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 人口学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 改革开放以来,市场经济发展所引发的社会分层的结构性调整使就业歧视问题日益凸显,然而法律等社会上层建筑的变革远落后于经济体制的变革本身。目前我国关于反就业歧视的立法显得过于原则和缺乏可操作性,与此同时,国内学界关于就业歧视的理论研究刚刚起步,关注程度有限,尚未形成独立的体系和成熟的理论,无法为立法与实践提供必要的支撑。因此,为保障平等就业权提供最直接和最有效的制度支撑,本文立足于中国就业歧视问题的现实,转变传统研究视角,以非制度性就业歧视和制度性就业歧视为主线,构建我国就业歧视抑制制度,就具有重大的理论价值和现实意义。本文所要解决的问题是：在中国语境下,如何建构就业歧视抑制制度。本文除导论与结语外分为五个部分：导论包括四部分内容：一是问题的提出,即我国反就业歧视实践的困境,这是本文的出发点和切入点,本文的归宿也正是通过理论的探讨,最终构建就业歧视抑制制度。二是对国外和国内就业歧视的研究现状进行梳理,并对我国研究的不足进行总结。三是概括性地介绍本文的核心论点和论证框架,从而为全文描绘了一个整体性的蓝图。四是介绍了选题的研究意义和方法。第1章是就业歧视的类型化。就业歧视研究视角的选择和确定对建构就业歧视抑制制度至关重要。本章旨在通过分析不同划分标准下的就业歧视类型,选择和确定研究就业歧视的最佳分类标准,并以该标准下的就业歧视类型为研究对象进行实证考察。这是建构就业歧视抑制制度的理论基础。首先,本章对不同划分标准下的就业歧视类型进行了分析和讨论,认为以就业歧视的成因为标准,将就业歧视分为制度性就业歧视和非制度性就业歧视,是研究就业歧视抑制制度的可行方法。其次,本章探讨了非制度性就业歧视的成因,指出市场机制与非制度性就业歧视的形成密切相关,并分别针对我国非制度性就业歧视中的性别、年龄、健康和户籍因素进行了实证考察。最后,本章探讨了制度性就业歧视的成因,指出政府管制存在难以克服的缺陷和局限性,政府失灵会导致制度性就业歧视现象。为与前文进行对比研究,本章亦分别针对我国制度性就业歧视中的性别、年龄、健康和户籍因素进行实证考察。后文将以第1章的论证为理论基础,分别研究抑制非制度性就业歧视和制度性就业歧视的方法。第2章是就业歧视抑制的基础：平等就业权的保障。本章通过探讨抑制就业歧视与平等就业权的关系,揭示了平等就业权的理念变迁,阐述了就业平等与就业自由、就业效率的关系。首先,本章分析了平等就业权的意涵,认为平等就业权是形式平等就业权和实质平等就业权的统一。其次,本章剖析了平等就业权的理念变迁。随着平等就业权的理念从形式平等走向实质平等,反歧视法的目标和价值亦由形式平等向实质平等转变。实质平等就业权是对形式平等就业权的矫正和补充,是平等就业权的最高级形态和终极目标,亦是反就业歧视法的最终目标和价值所在。最后,本章分析了就业平等与就业自由、就业平等与就业效率之间的辨证关系。一方面,我们应当正视就业平等和就业自由的矛盾,找到二者的契合点,转化为可以操作的配置权力和权利的机制,指导就业歧视抑制制度的构建；另一方面,平等就业权中的效率应当是一种综合性效率,一种帕累托的效率最优状态。因此,在资源稀缺的条件下,给予社会弱势群体倾斜性保护非但没有削弱效率,反而是促进竞争、增进效率的手段。第3章是非制度性就业歧视的制度化抑制。首先,针对非制度性就业歧视的成因,本章指出法治是抑制非制度性就业歧视的必然选择。其次,分析了抑制非制度性就业歧视的切入点,即非制度性就业歧视中的自然性社会弱势群体的权利保护问题。因此,法律通过权利的手段,运用政策性平衡的方式给予弱势群体倾斜性保护是抑制非制度性就业歧视的有效方法。最后,结合国外和国内的立法实践,本章剖析了政府对自然性社会弱势群体给予倾斜性保护时所涉及到的理论和实践问题,并提出了对策和建议。第4章是制度性就业歧视的制度化抑制。首先,针对制度性就业歧视的成因,本章指出法治是抑制制度性就业歧视的必然选择。其次,分析了抑制制度性就业歧视的切入点,即制度性壁垒的消除和法律冲突的治理。本章认为政府应当先保障制度性社会弱势群体的形式平等,再论及如何实现实质平等的问题。最后,本章分别从性别、年龄、健康、户籍四个方面分析如何消除制度性壁垒；并提出了预防法律冲突的建议,进而提出若要充分保障平等就业权,就必须建立违宪审查制度。在对世界各国采用的违宪审查模式进行梳理后,本章指出我们应当采取宪法委员会模式,实行以宪法委员会的专门机构审查为主的体制。第5章是就业歧视多元救济体系的建构。本章结合我国现有反就业歧视立法和审判实践,分别从司法、行政和准司法三个层面剖析了非制度性就业歧视救济制度和制度性就业歧视救济制度的弊端,探讨如何从司法救济、行政救济、准司法救济三个方面构建就业歧视的多维救济体系。首先,关于司法救济制度的补救,第一,本章认为应当采取以私益诉讼为基础,以行政公益诉讼为补充,以宪法平等权司法适用制度为后盾的制度安排；第二,关于就业歧视行为的认定问题,本章认为应当区分直接歧视和间接歧视,并采取客观主义模式考察直接歧视和间接歧视的构成要件；第三,本章进一步探讨了就业歧视的举证责任和法律责任问题。其次,关于行政救济制度的完善,本章认为应当制定专门的《劳动保障监察法》,明确规定各级人民政府监察的范围、程序、职责以及国家赔偿机制等,在《劳动保障监察条例》中增补规定就业歧视监察事项,同时完善《就业促进法》有关监督监察的规定。最后,关于准司法救济制度的确立,本章认为除了应当将就业歧视争议纳入劳动争议受案范围之外,我们还应当借鉴国外发达国家的先进经验,建立一个专门的准司法救济机构——平等机会委员会。本章考察了美国、英国、荷兰和香港的平等权利保障机构的运作模式,对我国平等机会委员会的构建提出了建议。本文的创新之处主要体现在以下三个方面：1.以新的研究视角审视就业歧视问题,使就业歧视的研究更加系统化和体系化,弥补我国现有理论研究的不足。目前,学界还没有人提出非制度性就业歧视的概念,更没有人对制度性就业歧视和非制度性就业歧视进行对比研究。本文转变传统研究视角,根据就业歧视的成因,提出了制度性就业歧视和非制度性就业歧视的概念,从体系上揭露了不同类型就业歧视的本质,并根据不同类型就业歧视的成因,选择不同的规制方法,建构就业歧视抑制制度。这具有一定的创新性。2.借鉴与融合国外先进经验,在中国语境下,研究就业歧视行为的构成要件。值得注意的是,国内学界关于是否应当区分直接歧视和间接歧视的研究仍是空白。关于歧视的司法认定,美国、欧盟等发达国家在立法中都将歧视区分为直接歧视和间接歧视,但近来,加拿大最高法院对该传统区分方法提出了质疑,认为没有必要区分直接歧视和间接歧视。对此,本文立足于中国现实,分析了间接歧视理论的价值,认为确立间接歧视理论,利大于弊,我国应当顺应国际立法趋势,在认定歧视时,区分直接歧视和间接歧视。本文对这一问题的解答无疑弥补了国内相关研究的空白。3.抑制非制度性就业歧视的方案是：政府给予自然性社会弱势群体倾斜性保护,这一设计具有创新性。在国外和国内的立法实践中,政府对社会弱势群体的政策性衡平措施通常表现为“积极行动”措施。本文结合国内外关于“积极行动”的立法规定,丛反向歧视和保护性歧视两个方面剖析了政府衡平行为的悖论。面对理论界对“积极行动”的质疑,本文提出了赞成“积极行动”的理由和破解悖论的界限准则。目前学界对非制度性就业歧视和“积极行动”的内在关系,以及“积极行动”所涉及的理论和实践问题,鲜有研究,因此,本文对该问题的全面梳理和深入剖析无疑具有理论价值。总而言之,抑制就业歧视是崇尚权利,追求善的社会制度、构建和谐美好社会蓝图的必然要求,意味着同等地尊重每一个人作为独立个体的尊严,意味着让社会每一个人共享正义的阳光。抑制就业歧视不是一句空洞的政治口号和道德宣言,而是一种如火如茶的制度实践!更多还原

【Abstract】 With the reform and opening-up policy, the problem of employment discrimination is becoming more and more important. Currently, the legislation on anti-employment discrimination is not very perfect and lacks maneuverability. What’s more, the study on employment discrimination is not enough, which can not provide the strong support for the legislation and practice. Accordingly, this article which bases upon Chinese reality, changes the traditional thoughtway, builds the system to restrain employment discrimination in china and provides the institutional support for equal employment right is valuable in theory and practice.The core question of the article is how to restrain employment discrimination in china.This article is composed by five parts besides introduction and conclusion.The introduction explains the article’s core questions, research path, and research methods and so on. We summarize the study condition on this issue, which makes us to begin at the place where others stop. This part gives an outline of the core views and logic of the article, through which we describe a blueprint for the article.Chapter 1 explores the types of employment discrimination in order to choose and ascertain the best angle of view on studying employment discrimination, which is the theory basic to build the system to restrain employment discrimination. Firstly, this part discusses the institutional employment discrimination and the non-institutional employment discrimination which are classified by the cause of formation, which is the best thoughtway to study employment discrimination. Secondly, this part analyzes the institutional employment discrimination’s causations which relate to market mechanism and actualities which include gender discrimination, age discrimination, health discrimination and household registration discrimination. Finally, this part analyzes the non-institutional employment discrimination’s causations which relate to government failure and actualities which include gender discrimination, age discrimination, health discrimination and household registration discrimination.Chapter 2 analyzes the equal employment right which is the basic of anti-employment discriminations. This part opens out the theory variance about the equal employment right and expounds the relation between equality, freedom and efficiency.Chapter 3 explores how to restrain the non-institutional employment discrimination. Firstly, the part points out that the rule of law is an inevitable choice to restrain the non-institutional employment discrimination. Secondly, the part analyzes the key to restrain non-institutional employment discrimination that is how to protect the rights of the disadvantaged groups of society. Finally, the part draws on the foreign experience and analyzes the questions of the theory and the practice that is how to defend vulnerable groups in society.Chapter 4 analyzes how to restrain the institutional employment discrimination. Firstly, the part points out that the rule of law is an inevitable choice to restrain the institutional employment discrimination. Secondly, the part analyzes the key to restrain institutional employment discrimination that is how to lift institutional barriers and rectify the conflict of laws. Finally, the part suggests we should build the judicial review of constitution to adequately guarantee the equal employment right.Chapter 5 analyzes how to build the relief system of employment discrimination. The part explores disadvantages of the current relief system about institutional employment discrimination and non-institutional employment discrimination and suggests how to build the relief system of employment discrimination through the judicial, administrative and quasi-judicial approaches.The innovations of this article reflect in several following aspects mainly:First, this article chooses and ascertains a new angle of view on studying employment discrimination, which fills up a deficiency of current study. Currently, nobody in educational circles had proposed the concept of non-institutional employment discrimination and had embarked the contrastive study between the institutional employment discrimination and the non-institutional employment discrimination. So this article is innovative.Second, this article studies the constitutive requirements of employment discrimination through drawing on the foreign experience.What is noteworthy is that nobody had attended the study about marking a distinction between the direct discrimination and the indirect discrimination. This article analyzes the values of the indirect discrimination and suggests we should make the distinction between the direct discrimination and the indirect discrimination, which fills up a deficiency of currently domestic study.Third, the key to restrain non-institutional employment discrimination is how to protect the rights of the disadvantaged groups of society. This proposal is innovative. Currently, few scholars had attended the internal relations between non-institutional employment discrimination and the positive action. So it is valuable to hackle and explore this question.On the whole, it is necessary to restrain the employment discrimination for pursuing the good social system. We should respect everybody’s dignity and guarantee fairness and justice. To restrain employment discrimination is not an empty politic slogan but also the institutional practice.更多还原