지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper analyzes China’s Labour Dispute Resolution System by examining its characteristics and tasks it is confronted with.
In accordance with Labour Law (1995), China’s Labour Dispute Resolution System is characterised by three-step procedural structures, that is, ‘One Conciliation, One Arbitration, and Two Litigations’ (yitiao yicai ershen). Conciliation is made mainly through Labour Dispute Conciliation Committee at the enterprise level. Furthermore, Law on Conciliation and Arbitration (2008) extends the conciliation institution to ‘people’s conciliation organisations established according to the law’ and ‘the organisations with the functions of labour dispute conciliations founded at the levels of counties, towns and neighbourhood.’ Arbitration is carried out via the arbitration institution under the jurisdiction of arbitration committees that are established by the governments at the county level or above. This is the primary institution and means of current China’s labour dispute resolution. Litigations are undertaken by the courts. However, China’s labour dispute litigation proceeds within the system of ‘four levels, two litigations’: labour dispute litigations are undertaken mainly at the primary courts and intermediate courts (if the first litigation is conducted at the intermediate courts, the second litigation then proceed to the high court). Consequently, labour dispute cases cannot be proceed to the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is difficult to form the legal principles for jurisprudence as the basis of labour dispute resolution in China.
On the other hand, according to China’s Labour Statistics Year Books (1995-2009), the incidence of labour dispute has kept growing. The cases of collective disputes and the number of people involved have been increasing dramatically. Most of labour disputes occurred in the economically developed areas. This can be predicted that the labour disputes may maintain a growing trend in the next few years, and may spread to inland provinces. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the tasks of China’s labour dispute resolution, via the analysis of reasons for and resolution systems of labour disputes occurred in six South-eastern provinces.
The reasons for high incidence of China’s labour disputes are extremely complicated. It is partly due to lack of law-abiding consciousness of entrepreneurs, workers’ weak awareness of labour rights, imbalance between actors of labour relations and absence of representatives of labour rights, as well as insufficient labour inspection system. The main reason, however, is the vulnerable dispute prevention system of trade unions and the absence of collective bargaining system.
Therefore, to establish an effective China’s labour dispute resolution systems, firstly, it is necessary to improve the law-abiding consciousness of entrepreneurs, to strengthen the functions of labour inspections and trade unions, as well as to set up the collective bargaining system, in order to inhibit the high incidence of labour disputes. In addition to enhance the administrative arbitration functions, it is necessary to effectively implement different kinds of conciliations stipulated in Law on Conciliation and Arbitration. The key tasks of strengthening arbitration, implementing conciliation, and effectively settle China’s labour disputes are to educate a group of people with abundant knowledge and experience, including arbitrators.
In accordance with Labour Law (1995), China’s Labour Dispute Resolution System is characterised by three-step procedural structures, that is, ‘One Conciliation, One Arbitration, and Two Litigations’ (yitiao yicai ershen). Conciliation is made mainly through Labour Dispute Conciliation Committee at the enterprise level. Furthermore, Law on Conciliation and Arbitration (2008) extends the conciliation institution to ‘people’s conciliation organisations established according to the law’ and ‘the organisations with the functions of labour dispute conciliations founded at the levels of counties, towns and neighbourhood.’ Arbitration is carried out via the arbitration institution under the jurisdiction of arbitration committees that are established by the governments at the county level or above. This is the primary institution and means of current China’s labour dispute resolution. Litigations are undertaken by the courts. However, China’s labour dispute litigation proceeds within the system of ‘four levels, two litigations’: labour dispute litigations are undertaken mainly at the primary courts and intermediate courts (if the first litigation is conducted at the intermediate courts, the second litigation then proceed to the high court). Consequently, labour dispute cases cannot be proceed to the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is difficult to form the legal principles for jurisprudence as the basis of labour dispute resolution in China.
On the other hand, according to China’s Labour Statistics Year Books (1995-2009), the incidence of labour dispute has kept growing. The cases of collective disputes and the number of people involved have been increasing dramatically. Most of labour disputes occurred in the economically developed areas. This can be predicted that the labour disputes may maintain a growing trend in the next few years, and may spread to inland provinces. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the tasks of China’s labour dispute resolution, via the analysis of reasons for and resolution systems of labour disputes occurred in six South-eastern provinces.
The reasons for high incidence of China’s labour disputes are extremely complicated. It is partly due to lack of law-abiding consciousness of entrepreneurs, workers’ weak awareness of labour rights, imbalance between actors of labour relations and absence of representatives of labour rights, as well as insufficient labour inspection system. The main reason, however, is the vulnerable dispute prevention system of trade unions and the absence of collective bargaining system.
Therefore, to establish an effective China’s labour dispute resolution systems, firstly, it is necessary to improve the law-abiding consciousness of entrepreneurs, to strengthen the functions of labour inspections and trade unions, as well as to set up the collective bargaining system, in order to inhibit the high incidence of labour disputes. In addition to enhance the administrative arbitration functions, it is necessary to effectively implement different kinds of conciliations stipulated in Law on Conciliation and Arbitration. The key tasks of strengthening arbitration, implementing conciliation, and effectively settle China’s labour disputes are to educate a group of people with abundant knowledge and experience, including arbitrators.
목차
はじめに
Ⅰ. 中國における勞?紛爭處理システムの槪要と運用?況
Ⅱ. 中國における??紛??理システムの特色
Ⅲ. 中國における勞?紛爭處理システムの課題
結びにかえて
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (15)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
영국의 노동분쟁 해결 제도에 관한 연구
노동법논총
2008 .12
-
개정노동법과 종합병원의 노무관리전략
한국병원경영학회지
2010 .01
-
CHILD LABOUR
법학연구
1985 .06
-
노동분쟁해결시스템의 현황과 과제 : 법원 및 노동위원회를 중심으로
노동법연구
2005 .06
-
고용계약과 근로계약의 개념검토 - 근로자보호를 중심으로 -
기업법연구
2005 .06
-
제정 노동법의 주요내용과 특징 : 일본법과의 비교를 중심으로
노동법학
2013 .12
-
The Meaning of Work and Labour Commitment in Korea
한국사회학
1977 .12
-
서울시 노동정책 발전전략
서울연구원 정책과제연구보고서
2015 .07
-
Labour Law Reform and Flexibility In India and China
산업관계연구
2008 .12
-
Thailand’s Ratification of the 2014 Protocol to the Forced Labour Convention of 1930
JOURNAL OF EAST ASIA AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
2019 .01
-
경제위기 이후 스페인 노동시장의 개혁과 성과 -고용지표의 변화를 통한 고찰-
지중해지역연구
2019 .01
-
20C 勞動法 歷史에 관한 小考 : 第1, 2次 世界大戰 前後의 變化를 中心으로
노동법논총
2006 .06
-
근무시간중 노조활동과 노조전임제는 중재재정의 대상이 아닌가
법학논총
1996 .02
-
노동 연구 비판 : 노동의 운동인가 노동력의 운동인가
마르크스주의 연구
2007 .05
-
지식노동과 정보재 가치 논쟁
마르크스주의 연구
2009 .02
-
테크놀로지, 노동, 그리고 삶의 취약성
한국언론정보학보
2016 .10
-
동북아 지역통합의 가능성 - 한·중·일 경제협력의 심화와 관련 노동․사회법적 새로운 거버넌스의 모색: 유럽연합(EU)의 경험과 동북아 지역의 비교 연구의 관점에서 -
동북아법연구
2010 .01
-
한국의 쟁의행위와 책임
노동법학
2014 .12
-
대안적 노동 원리 : 노동으로부터의 해방과 노동을 통한 해방
마르크스주의 연구
2015 .02
-
해사노동기준의 국제적 통일화
해사법연구
2006 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-360-003048173