從國道收費員爭議案看就業安置議題

Abstract

本論文研究主旨是整理國道收費員抗爭始末，瞭解收費員的訴求與政府相關單位的回應，進而釐清發生爭議的真正原因，並據此檢視國道收費員的抗爭行為與訴求內容之合理性。藉由文獻分析與研讀官方文件，本論文認為造成爭議的原因有: （1）國內現行法令對營業變更時勞動權益保護機制不夠周延、（2）高公局與遠通公司合約中對就業安置的規定不夠明確、（3）國道收費員在國道收費電子化決策過程之參與不足。\n為能以此次案例作為前車之鑑，減少日後勞工因在業務消失、移轉或在公轉民過程的分工中陷入不安定的工作狀態，本論文根據上列發生爭議的原因，提出四項政策政策建議：（1）預先謹慎評估營業變更對原受雇員工勞動權益之影響與反應、（2）規劃明確可行之就業安置計畫、（3）強化受雇員工對營業變更計畫與後續就業安置計畫之參與、（4）修改國內相關法律，對營業變更改採勞動契約存續保障之制度設計。\n此外，本論文認為雖然就法制面而言，高公局對國道收費員的解僱與後續就業安置都符合現行法令，惟此合法性只能提供國道收費員財產權上的保障，亦即可以領到資遣費，卻無法保障其工作權。由於大多數國道收費員的年齡都遠低於退休年齡，所以他們最期待的是工作權保障。就此而言，其抗爭行為與訴求內容雖逾越國內現行法令，但有其合理性。

The main purpose of this thesis is to summarize the event of highway tollbooth collectors’ struggle, understand their appeal and the response of the relevant government units, and then clarify the real cause of the dispute, and, accordingly to examine the collectors’ protest behavior and the reasonableness of the content of the claim. Through literature review and study of official documents, this paper considers that the reasons for the dispute are: (1)the existing domestic laws and regulations on the protection of labor rights and interests in the event of business changes are not extensive, (2)the provisions on employment placement in the contract between the Gaogong Bureau and the Yuantong Corporation are not clear enough, and (3) the participation of national highway toll payers in the decision-making process of electronic state road charges is insufficient.\nBased on the above edified reasons for the dispute, this paper proposes four policy recommendations: (1) to do assessment carefully of the impact on employees’ rights and interests and their reaction before the transfer of undertaking, (2) planning clear and feasible employment placement proposals, (3) strengthening the participation of employees in the decision of the transfer of undertaking and the subsequent employment placement proposals,(4 ) to amend the relevant laws in Taiwan for improving the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, including the transfer of labor contract .\nIn addition, this paper holds that although the dismissal of highway tollbooth collectors and the subsequent placement of employment are in line with the existing law, this legality can only provide protection of the property rights of state-owned toll payers, that is, they can receive payment, but they cannot guarantee their right to work. Since most collectors are far below retirement age, they are most looking forward to the right to work. In this regard, its protest behavior and the content of the appeal, although it exceeds the existing domestic laws and regulations, but has its rationality.