職業工會罷工之爭議問題研究 －以2016年桃園市空服員職業工會罷工為中心

Abstract

我國自2011年勞動三法修正以來，工會活動日益蓬勃發展，工會組織型態亦更加多元。有別於台灣社會過去發起之罷工皆是以企業工會為主體，2016年華航空服員罷工行動，是我國首次以職業工會為主體所發動之罷工！\n本研究以2016年桃園市空服員職業工會罷工事件為核心，探討因職業工會之跨企業及跨廠場之組織特性，行使罷工權可能發生之特殊問題，並提出三個研究子題：職業工會罷工之主體適格性、職業工會罷工範圍之選擇、職業工會罷工投票程序，進一步探討職業工會於罷工時可能發生的法律問題，並提出本研究見解及修法建議。\n除此之外，系爭罷工開始後不到二十四小時，勞資雙方即在勞動部官員的見證下簽訂協議，華航對於工會提出的七項訴求全數同意，其中亦包含最多爭議的外站津貼禁搭便車條款約定，因此本研究針對系爭罷工案例中的兩大問題：系爭協議之性質，以及系爭協議中關於禁搭便車約款之合法性進行探討。關於系爭結束罷工之協議，本研究整理實務界與學界之見解，並且就團體協約法之締結程序與生效要件、團體協約之效力與內容、團體協約與一般性團體協議之差別進行說明，而後提出本研究見解與修法建議。\n而關於系爭協議中禁搭便車條款之合法性，本研究就我國禁搭便車條款之權利侵害與適用問題進行分析，再回到華航與空職工之勞資爭議脈絡，來探討2016年結束罷工協議中關於禁搭便車條款約定之合法性爭議，並得出系爭約款合法有效之結論。

Since the amendment of the three labor laws, as known as Labor Union Act, Collective Agreement Act, and Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes, in 2011, union activities have grown vigorously, and the types of union organizations have become more diverse. Different from strikes initiated mainly by corporate unions in the past, the China Airlines flight attendant strike action in 2016 was the first strike initiated by a craft union in Taiwan!\nThis research focused on the strike initiated by the Taoyuan Flight Attendants Union in 2016, and discussed special issues encountered while exercising the right to strike because of the cross-enterprise and cross-factory organizational characteristics of craft unions. The research pointed out three subtopics about craft unions： the eligibility to call a strike, the selection of the scope of the strike, and the procedure of strike voting. The research further explored the legal issues during strikes by craft unions, and provided opinions and suggestions for amendments of the laws.\nIn addition, in less than twenty-four hours after the strike started, the union and the employer signed an agreement under the witness of the officials of the Ministry of Labor. China Airlines, the employer, agreed to all seven claims of the strike, including the most controversial agreement on the ban against free riders. This research investigated two issues in this strike case： the nature of the agreement and the legality of the ban against free-riders. This research also collected opinions from legal practice and academics, discussed the concluding process and the requirements of effectiveness of a collective agreement regulated in the Collective Agreement Act, the effect and contents of a collective agreement, and the differences between a collective agreement and an ordinary grouped contract, and then provided opinions and suggestions for amendments of the laws.\nFinally, this research analyzed the right infringement and application of the free-rider clause in the Collective Agreement Act, and discussed the dispute of the legality of the ban against free-riders in the aforementioned agreement between China Airlines and the Taoyuan Flight Attendants Union, and made the conclusion that such agreement was legal and effective.