Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139500


Title: 勞基法第24條延長工作時間工資之計算之相關問題
Article 24 of the Labor Standards Act to Extend the Working Time Wage Calculations Related Issues
Authors: 吳姿慧
Wu, Tzu-Hui
Contributors: 勞工所
Keywords: 工作時間;延長工作時間;工資;平日工資;平均工資;加 班費;延時工資;工時規定之除外適用;勞基法第八十四條 之一
Working hours; work longer hours; wages; weekdays wages; average wage; overtime; Delay wages; work hours as required except applicable; One of Article 84 of the Labor Standards Law
Date: 2014-07
Issue Date: 2022-03-29
Abstract: 勞工每日正常工作時間不得超過 8小時,每 2週工作總時數不得超過 84 小時, 此為勞動基準法(底下簡稱「勞基法」)第 30 條之明文規定。雇主於第 30 條所 定正常工作時間以外時間,仍有使勞工延長工作時間之必要,其要件及延長時數 分別定於第 32 條第 1項與第 2項,延時工資之計算方式則定於第 24 條。依勞基 法第 24 條之規定「雇主延長勞工工作時間者,其延長工作時間之工資依左列標 準加給之:一、延長工作時間在二小時以內者,按平日每小時工資額加給三分之 一以上。二、再延長工作時間在二小時以內者,按平日每小時工資額加給三分之 二以上。三、依第三十二條第三項規定,延長工作時間者,按平日每小時工資額 加倍發給之。」亦即雇主對於延長工時之勞工加給工資時,係按其平日每小時工 資額,依其延長工作時間 2 小時以內、再延長工作時間 2 小時以內或是屬第 32 條第 3項規定之延長工作,而分別加給三分之一、三分之二或是加倍發給。不過 條文雖明定計算之標準,部分行業於運作時,卻因行業之特質而有若干便宜之計 算方式,致其加班費之計算是否符合勞基法第 24 條之規定引發爭議,其中尤以 客運業發給延長工時工資之約定,最受矚目。 客運業之薪資結構,除約定之底薪外,常見尚包括載客獎金、里程獎金、服務 評鑑獎勵金、山區安全獎金、開線獎金業績獎金、敬業獎金、專車津貼、單班津 貼等各種項目獎金或津貼。由於發給之津貼名目眾多,究竟是否均屬「工資」之 意涵,已有歧見1,因此是否為計算第 24 條加班費之基準,以及如何採入計算, 均有問題。因薪資項目繁複、不固定,客運業者常見之作法是自訂計點公式,駕 駛員每日實際之工作時間換算出所值點數以及與之對應之金額,客運業者認為此 一計點公式已包含本俸、加班費以及清潔費、伙食費等各種獎金在內2,駕駛員 則認為依此計點公式推算,雇主發給之薪資有哪些部分屬於延長工時之工資,並 不清楚;即使薪資表清楚指出哪些部分是延時工資,該些部分卻是以底薪計算(部 分業者也直接於勞資會議約定以底薪為計算基礎),並不包括與勞務對價有關或 經常性給予等具有工資性質之津貼部分,換言之,雇主單以底薪計算加班費,與 勞基法第 24 條按「平日每小時工資額」全薪概念之規定,有所牴觸,且其計算 1 以最高法院 100 年度台上字第 1256 號判決為例,除了服務評鑑獎勵金非屬工資性質,最高法 院採取與前審法院相同之見解外,其餘之山區安全獎金、補貼薪資調整、業績獎金、敬業獎金、 專車津貼、單班津貼等項目,原審均認為屬恩惠性給予,不予計入,最高法院之判決則採不同見 解,均認有探求餘地,傾向認定為工資。 2 例如臺灣高等法院 95 年度勞上更(一)字第 13 號、臺北地方法院 95 年度勞訴字第 11 號、臺灣 高等法院 96 年度勞上易字第 55 號,業者均為如此主張。 方式也未依三分之一、三分之二或是加倍發給之加成方式計算之。故,勞基法第 24 條所定之「平日工資」範圍為何?雇主可否於每月發薪時逕發一筆金額,即 稱該筆依計點公式換算出之總金額,已包括平日工資以及延時工資在內,或稱此 種計算方式乃雙方合意之約定,故不牴觸勞基法第 24 條之規定,為本研究首重 之要點。其次,延長工時加發之工資,依現行法之規定是「按平日每小時工資額」 計算,勞雇可否另行約定改以補修或部分以補休取代加班費之發放,此則涉本條 之法律性質與強制規定以及違反之效力有關,亦為本研究之關注重點。 對於前述之爭點,我國實務有兩種截然不同之見解,值得注意,以最高法院法 院 100 年度台上字第 1256 號判決為例,判決認為:公車業者僱用之駕駛員因薪 資結構除底薪為固定數額外,另有里程津貼、載客津貼等變動金額項目,該變動 金額項目,常因各種狀況不同而變動,駕駛員每日正常工作時間內所得之報酬, 將隨之變動。為免計算假日工作及平日延長工作時間加班費之煩雜,難以確定數 額,倘公車業者與其所屬駕駛員另行議定假日工作及平日延長工作時間工資加給 之計算方式而未低於基本工資者,似與勞基法第 21 條第 1 項規定工資由勞雇雙 方議定之立法意旨無違,則勞雇經勞資會議決議以底薪為計算加班費之計算方法 似難認違反勞基法之強制規定3。 相對於前述見解,持相反意見之判決,更不在少數。例如最高法院 101 年台上 字第 599 號判決指出「勞基法第二十四條延長工時工資及第三十九條假日工作加 給工資所定之最低標準,均係依所約定之平日工資為計算之基礎,…而平日工 資,依勞基法第二條第三款之規定,係指勞工因工作而獲得之報酬,只要是經常 性給與,包括工資、薪金及計時、計件之獎金、津貼等,及其他不論為任何名義, 因工作而經常性給與者均屬之,且應具體認定,不受形式上所使用名稱之影響。」 判決強調,加班費計算之平日工資係依勞基法工資之規定予以認定,可知勞雇另 行約定僅以底薪計算,將使「因工作而獲得之報酬」以及「經常性給與」具工資 性質之各項津貼排除在外;相同見解又如最高法院 97 年台上字第 929 號判決所 言,勞基法第 24 條、第 39 條規定之平日每小時工資及工資應加倍給付,其所謂 之「工資」,均指勞工因工作而經常獲得之報酬而言,「故憑以計算延長工作時 間之工資及加倍發給例休假日之工資,係以勞工因工作而經常獲得之報酬為基 礎,而非以基本工資為憑算基礎」,並認為「駕駛員之工資應合併本俸及上開獎 3 認同勞雇另行約定計算延長工時薪資計算內容者,尚有板橋地方法院 98 年度勞訴字第 152 號 判決。 金等給與作為平日工資,並按此計算給付延長工時工資及假日工作加給」,且「勞 工延長工作時間、休假及例假日照常工作者,雇主應依同法第二十四條規定標準 發給延長工作時間之工資及依第三十九條第一項規定加倍發給工資。是上開勞動 條件之規定,俱為最低標準且屬強制規定。故除非有法律明文規定,例如勞基法 第八十四條之一規定之情形,並經中央主管機關核定公告之勞工,得排除適外, 勞雇雙方均應遵守。」換言之,勞基法第 24 條係強制規定,除有法律明文排除 其適用,勞雇不得另行約定計算加班費之計算方式。 前述肯定勞雇得另行議定加班費發放標準之第一種見解,如以經濟成本抑制超 時工作之加班費與客運業追求運輸效率間之關係,以及現行第 24 條所規定之計 算方式來看,誠然可以理解:客運業乃以運送旅客以獲得運費報酬之行業,旅客 依其搭乘路線支付票價,不因運送較預定時間提早抵達而要求退費;旅客也不因 塞車超過預定抵達時間認為獲得較多之服務,須補足超過預定抵達時間之運送 費,因此,路線固定與準時抵達乃運送業營業之核心特質,雇主未必從勞工延長 之工作時間,獲取較高的收益4。因運送過程路況之不可預期,無法精準預估勞 務時間,雇主乃從可獲取多少數量(工作時間)之勞務給付,取其預估之平均值 支付工資5。此亦為業者以一筆總額支付工資並謂其包含底薪以及各項津貼之背 景;另外,依現行之規定,勞工延長工作時間計算加班費乃按「平日每小時工資 額」計之,如要將各項津貼一一對應計算為平日工資,該些津貼須先換算成每小 時之金額,再依規定分別加給三分之一或三分之二(約乘以 1.33 倍或 1.67 倍), 實際上計算不易,不易之因在於,部分津貼其實具有計件概念,例如「趟次獎金」 在一定工作時間內完成之趟次,故計算「平日」工資時,須依「當日」出車數量 而定;此外,部分津貼含有平均之概念,必須將整個月或整段時間之成果平均除 之,方能獲得,例如差額補貼調整薪資、5 萬分配數、敬業獎金,須以平均之方 式,換算成平日每小時之工資額(例如除以一個月或三個月,視該項津貼含括之 期間),因計算方式趨向、類似平均工資,致業者僅將之計入每月薪資,卻不計 屬於當日延長工時之加班費,換言之,這些本屬工資之津貼部分,於計算退休金 或資遣費「平均工資」時計入之,卻於計算每日之加班費時不予計入,致計算退 休日前 6個月平均工資時,計入之加班費少了該些津貼作為加班費之計算基礎。 此外,部分津貼以勞工提供之勞務總量(包括正常以及延長工時)計其額度,例 4 由其是採取每日固定趟次之業者,更無從勞工延長之工作時間獲取較高的收益。 5 板橋地方法院 98 年度勞訴字第 152 號判決。 如績效獎金合計正常與延長工時之勞務總量而得,將每月之績效獎金平均為「平 日工資」之後,計入,將重複了延時工資;不計入,又忽視其亦為正常工時之所 獲,計入或不計入似都成問題。 然而,縱有上述之計算困難,肯定說者應斟酌底下之問題:勞基法第 24 條延 長工作時間之工資加給標準,以第 1款為例,條文文字係「按平日每小時工資額 加給三分之一以上」,不是以底薪計之,更不是以基本工資計之6,而是以「平日 工資」加給,故只要是屬於工資之範圍均屬之,至於各項津貼屬於工資卻難以換 算成「每小時」之概念,乃屬另一事,換言之,雇主縱謂依勞基法第 21 條雙方 議定之工資已包括本薪以及延時工資在內,且換算每小時之工資及加班費,均不 低於基本工資,對照現行「平日工資」之規定,恐仍難謂合乎法律之規定。另, 再從工資之給付應以法定通用貨幣為之、應全額直接給付勞工、每月至少定期發 給二次等各項原則,均有當事人另有特別約定不在此限之排除規定,勞基法第 22 條第 1 項、第 2 項以及第 23 條均有明定,相對的,第 24 條並無當事人另行 約定從其約定之除外規定,由是可知本條為強制規定,並無另予當事人另行約定 之空間7,現行客運業無論是採計點制,謂以一筆總額即已包含本薪與合乎法定 之加班費(除非區別清楚各自金額,且加班費係依「平日工資」計算得出),或 是加班費另依底薪計算之約定,恐均無其適法之空間。 前述肯定說之見解,以現行之明文,恐較難得出圓滿之解釋,不過,肯定說所 呈現部分行業適用現行勞基法第 24 條之困境,卻也不可輕忽,因此學說上有將 勞基法第 24 條計算平日工資之概念不完全等同第 2 條之工資概念,對於部分行 業之實施狀況以「應為對勞基法第 39 條、24 條所稱之『工資』的目的性限縮」 解釋之8。此外,特殊行業發給之津貼,按延長之時間計算加班費,因換算不易, 現行法亦應考慮細定其正常工時工資之原約定為計時、計件或混合時,各自加給 延時工資之計算方式;如認某些行業以此方式加給確有窒礙難行,基於政策考量 而欲採取如同勞基法第 84-1 條之工時除外適用規定,並依實務見解除排除第 24 條加班費之計算規定,亦需予以明定,方得使勞雇另行約定或議定加班費之計算 方式,獲得法源基礎。 至於延長工作時間之報酬得否改採補休,參照外國法制,以德國為例,德國工 6 參見最高法院 97 年台上字第 929 號判決之判決理由。 7 同樣認為法條如要排除其強制規定之效力,應有「經勞雇雙方另有約定」之規定,然第 24 條 並未有相關之程序予以解除強行效力,參見王能君,勞動基準法上加班法律規範與問題之研究- 日本與台灣之加班法制與實務,台北大學法學論叢第 81 期,2011,頁 123。 8 參見林更盛,論勞基法上的工資,政大法學評論第 58 期,1997,頁 347。 時法(Arbeitszeitgesetz)並無關於工資報酬之明文規定,無論是正常工時或 延長工時之薪資報酬均由勞雇以契約、企業協定或最常見之團體協約約定之9。 勞工於正長工時以外之時間工作,除須得勞工同意外,通常亦有另給報酬之約 定,不過「加班費」不一定都是以金錢給付,可能以增加年假時間之方式 (Freizeitausgleich)或減少其他工作時間替代之。因法律並無明定延長工時 報酬之給付方式與內容,故補假做為延長工時之報酬,普遍為法院承認10。無論 以何種方式給付,加班費之給予內容應該明確,德國實務常見對於具有管理權限 之高階受雇者,以包含延長工時在內之整筆薪資總額做為給付方式,法院認為只 要加班時數與報酬之間並無顯然不相當之關係( kein auffallendes Missverhältnis),即認其約定有效11。不過,包含加班費之整筆薪資給付約定 (Überstundenpauschalierungsabrede)可適用於具有管理權限之高階受雇者卻 未必適用於一般之勞雇關係,德國聯邦勞動法院指出包括加班費在內之整筆薪資 約定,勞工無從確切得知其正常工作與延長工作之時間所對應之報酬,因欠缺明 確性,故法院通常否決其效力12。 由於我國學說關於加班費之論述脈絡常見於各項津貼是否屬於工資之探討,關 於工資之概念與範疇研究甚多,但直接或是專論勞基法第 24 條之法律性質,尤 其是本條「平日工資」之概念、與勞基法第 2條第 3款工資之概念是否完全一致、 與「平均工資」有何不同等,相關之研究比較缺乏。故,本文即以上述爭點作為 論文之探究要點。此外,法院判決常將勞基法第 84-1 條除外工作者不受勞基法 工時與延時工資計算相關之規定及原理,援用於非屬勞基法第 84-1 條之工作 者,例如客運業,並以其工作具有特殊性,故只要其本薪與延時工資合計不低於 基本工資,難未與法不合。姑且不論勞基法第 84-1 條工時除外適用之規定,是 否也排除勞基法第 24 條,勞雇得另行約定加班費之計算標準,單以其性質而言, 本文所探討之行業並不屬之,因此兩者有加以釐清之必要。 9 Preis, Erfurter Kommentar zum Arbeitsrecht, 12. Aufl. 2012, Rn 665-666. 10 Vgl. BAG 4. 5. 1994, NZA 1994, 1035; BAG 17. 1. 1995, NZA 1995, 1000. 11 此為慕尼黑邦勞動法院見解,vgl. Landesarbeitsgericht München, Urteil vom 1. August 2007, Aktenzeichen: 10 Sa 93/07;杜塞道夫邦勞動法院(Das Landesarbeitsgericht Düsseldorf)則不贊成,vgl. Urteil vom 11. Juli 2008, Aktenzeichen 9 Sa 1958/07。 12 參見 BAG 1.9.2010, 5 AZR 517/09 之判決主文。相同見解例如 BAG 5. 8. 2009, AP BGB § 242 Betriebliche Übung Nr. 85; BAG 11. 10. 2006, AP BGB § 308 Nr. 6. 
Article 24 of the Labor Standards Act to extend the working time wage calculations related issues The labor daily during normal working hours shall not exceed eight hours every two weeks worked a total of not more than 84 hours, this is Article 30 of the Labor Standards Law (underneath referred to the Labor Standards Law ") expressly provides. Employers in Article 30 of the time outside normal working hours, and still make the labor to extend the working hours necessary, its elements and extend when the number of, respectively, given in Article 32 of the first and second Xiang delay wages of calculation is given in the first 24. In accordance with the provisions of Article 24 of the Labor Standards Law, "the employer to extend the working hours of workers, extend working hours and wages in accordance with the following criteria to: work longer hours in less than two hours to one-third of the regular hourly wage plus more than one second, and then to work longer hours in less than two hours, adding to the more than two-thirds of the regular hourly wage, in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, the third to extend working hours by weekday each the hourly capital contributions to redouble the issue of. "ie employers to extend the working hours of labor to wage plus their regular hourly wage, according to their less than two hours to work longer hours, and then to work longer hours to 2 hours or case 32 3 to work longer, respectively, added to the one-third and two-thirds, or double the regular rate. However, the provisions stipulates that the calculation of the standard, some industries in operation, because the characteristics of the industry and there are a number of cheap calculation caused the overtime calculation is in line with the provisions of Article 24 of the Labor Standards Law sparked controversy, particularly among passenger The industry distributed extend working hours wage agreement, the most watched. The salary structure of the passenger transport industry, in addition to the basic salary of the agreed common still the passenger bonus mileage bonuses, service Evaluation incentives, mountain safety bonus, open line bonus performance bonus, devotion bonus, car allowance, single shift allowances and other projects bonuses or allowances. Of allowances issued many names are "wages" implications of whether there are differences of opinion, whether calculated on the basis of Article 24 overtime, as well as how mining into the calculation, have problems. Due to complicated payroll project, not fixed, the passenger industry practice commonly custom meter point formula, translated at the driver's actual daily work time points of the value and the corresponding amount, passenger industry that already contains a meter point formula a variety of bonuses, including base salary, overtime pay, as well as cleaning fees, meals, etc., the driver is considered so meter point formula projections employer to the salary which parts belong to extend the working hours of wages is not clear; even if the salary table is clear pointed out which parts of delayed wages, those part based on the basic salary calculation (part of the industry is also directly in labor-management conference agreed basic salary is calculated on the basis of), not including labor related to the price or recurrent part of the wages of the nature of the allowance given, In other words, the employer single basic salary calculation of overtime, with the Labor Standards Law 24 "regular hourly wage" the concept of full-pay provisions, inconsistent, and calculated way Failure to one-third, one-third of two, or double the regular addition of. Therefore, 24 of the Labor Standards Law, the range of "weekdays wages" Why? Can an employer in the monthly payroll diameter sent a sum of money, and that the total amount of said sum in accordance with the interest-point formula translation, including weekday wages and delay wages or such calculations is the consent of the parties, convention, so do not contravene the provisions of Article 24 of the touch Labor Standards Act, the study of the first heavy points. Second, the extension of working hours plus hair wages, in accordance with the provisions of the existing law is "regular hourly wage calculation, whether employers and employees can agree otherwise change to replace overtime of Buxiu or part to compensatory issuance, this is involved in this section of the legal nature and related to the effectiveness of mandatory and violation of, and is also the focus of the study. For the aforementioned point of contention, our practice has two distinct insights worth noting that the 1256 judgment of the Supreme Court Court 100 annual stage word judgment: employment of the driver of the bus industry because of the salary structure in addition to the basic salary for fixed amount, otherwise mileage allowance, passenger allowances and other changes in the amount of the project, the change in the amount of projects, often due to a variety of different conditions to change the driver from compensation within the normal daily working hours will result in changes. Extend the working hours of overtime the cumbersome calculation of holiday work weekdays for Free, it is difficult to determine the amount of the event Bus industry and its own driver otherwise agreed to extend the holiday work and weekdays working time calculation of wage increases to but not less than the basic wage, like with The provisions of Article 21 of the Labor Standards Law, a wage Nothing against the legislative intent of both employers and employees agreed, employers and employees by Labour Conference resolution to the basic salary for the calculation method of the calculation of overtime seems difficult to recognize the violation of the Labor Standards Act, a mandatory requirement. With respect to the foregoing opinion, held the opposite view of the judgment, and more unusual. For example, the Supreme Court 101 years of stage 599 judgment pointed out that wages and Article 39 of the "Labor Standards Law Article 24 Working longer holiday work to set minimum standards of wages, in accordance with the conventions of weekdays wages calculated based on the weekdays wages, in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of the Labor Standards Law, refers to labor work to obtain the reward, as long as recurrent give, including wages, salaries and timing, piecework incentive payments , allowances, etc., and whether any name, the giver recurrent work are, and should be specifically identified, from formal to use the name of the impacts. judgment stressed, the overtime calculations weekdays wages accordance the provisions of the Labor Standards Act wage to be identified, seen by workers and employers agree otherwise only basic salary calculation will "reward" work "regular payments" with wage nature of various allowances excluded; same view and if Supreme Court to 97 years stage word No. 929 judgment said, 24 of the Labor Standards Law, the provisions of section 39 of the regular hourly wage and wages should be doubled benefits, its so-called "wage" labor often refer to get compensation, "it is with calculated to extend the vacation date wages of working hours and wages, and double the regular case, the Department of labor work often receive compensation based, rather than the basic wage with count-based" and driver's wages should be merged base salary on the open bonuses given as weekdays wages, and wages and holiday benefits extend working hours to "this calculation, and labor to work longer hours, vacations and holidays as usual workers , the employer shall be distributed in accordance with Article 24 of the same Act required standard to extend the working hours of wages and double the regular rate of wages in accordance with the provisions of Article 39 on the open labor conditions provisions, all minimum standards are The mandatory Therefore, unless expressly provided by law, for example, the case of one of the provisions of Article 84 of the Labor Standards Law, and the central competent authority approval and announcement of labor may exclude applicable, both employers and employees shall comply. "In other words, Article 24 of the Labor Standards Law Department is mandatory, unless the law expressly excluded its application, employers and employees may not otherwise agreed to calculate overtime calculation. Foregoing certainly labor employed otherwise agreed overtime payment standard of the first insights, such as the economic cost of suppression overtime work overtime with the passenger transport industry to pursue the relationship between transport efficiency, as well as view the calculations under the existing section 24 It is true that you can understand: passenger transport is based on the transport of passengers to get freight paid sectors, travelers pay the fare according to their riding routes, do not request a refund arrived ahead of schedule due to transportation; travelers do not arrive due to traffic congestion exceeds a predetermined time to think more service required to make up more than the scheduled arrival time of delivery costs, therefore, fixed route and arrive at the appointed time is in the transportation industry business core qualities, employers may not obtain higher revenue from labor overtime work. Not be accurate due to unexpected delivery process traffic estimated labor time, employers are labor benefits from the available amount (time), whichever is the estimate of the average payment of wages. Also industry to the sum of the total paid claims that contains the background of the basic salary and various allowances; In addition, in accordance with the current provisions of the labor to work longer hours to calculate overtime based on "regular hourly wage" into account, such as the To the various allowances-one correspondence is calculated as weekdays wages, the allowance must first be converted into the amount per hour, in accordance with the provisions were added to the one-third or two-thirds multiplied by 1.33 times and 1.67 times (about), in fact, calculation is not easy, is not easy reason is that part of the allowance actually have a piece-concept, for example, the trip times bonus "in a certain time of completion of the trip times" weekdays "wages, depending on the number of" day "out of the bus, the calculation of ; In addition, part of the allowance contains average concept must In addition to the average of the results of the whole month or the entire time in order to obtain, for example, the difference between the subsidy adjustment salary 50,000 allocation dedicated bonuses, the average of converted the weekday hourly wage (for example, divided by a month or three months, depending on the allowance encompasses the period), due to the calculation method tends, similar to the average wage, caused by the industry only to be included in the monthly salary, but not count belonging the day to extend the working hours of overtime, in other words, this is the part of wages, allowances, credited in the calculation of pension or severance pay "average wage", but is not counted in the calculation of daily overtime, causing computation of retirement the average wage for six months before the credited overtime less the allowance as overtime calculation basis. In addition, part of the allowance to the total amount of labor provided by labor (including normal and extend working hours) The amount of the aggregate of performance bonuses normally derived and extend the working hours of the total amount of labor, the average monthly performance bonuses "weekdays wages "after crediting the repeated delay wages; not included in, and ignore the normal working hours also received included or not included in the like are a problem. However, even if we have the above calculation difficulties, certainly those who should, where appropriate, the bottom of the problem: Article 24 of the Labor Standards Act work longer hours wages plus to the standard, paragraph 1, for example, the provisions of the text lines added to the regular hourly wage more than one-third, not in basic salary of more than the basic wage, but added to the "weekdays wages" to, so are the wages of range are, As for the various allowances belonging wages is difficult to Conversion into a "per hour" concept, the other thing is, in other words, the employer vertical that in accordance with Article 21 of the Labor Standards Act of wages agreed, including base salary as well as delay wages, and the translation of the hourly wage and overtime are not less than the basic wage, the required control existing weekday wages "that fulfills the requirements of the law, fear is still hard. Another, from the payment of the wages should be legal, circulating currency, should be in full direct payment of labor, at least a month sent regularly to the secondary the principles have the parties otherwise specifically agreed unless the exclusion, the Labor Standards Law Article 22, Section 1, 2 and 23 are defined relative, 24 had no parties agree otherwise agreement shall prevail except provisions mandatory is knowable by this section, there is no other to parties separate conventions of space, regardless of the current passenger transport is taken into account, the point system that already contains the sum total base salary in line with the statutory overtime pay (unless a clear distinction between the respective amount, and overtime is calculated drawn by "weekdays wages") or overtime In addition, according to the basic salary calculated the conventions of its legality, fear had no space. Foregoing say for sure that the insights expressly prevailing fear is more difficult to come to a satisfactory explanation, however, say for sure that some industries presented by 24 of the current Labor Standards Act are applicable plight, but also can not be ignored, the doctrine of the Labor Standards Law No. 24 calculated weekdays wage concept is not exactly the same as the two wage concept for some sectors of the status of implementation of the "narrow term" wages "purpose of Article 39 of the Labor Standards Law, 24 "Explain. In addition, special industry of allowances distributed to calculate overtime, extended time, arising from the translation is not easy, the existing law should also consider the fine given their normal working hours wages originally agreed timing, the piecework or mixed respective to delay wage calculated way; certain industries as recognized in this way and to really difficult to implement, based on policy considerations and wish to take the applicable requirements as Article 84-1 of the Labor Standards Law, working hours, except to see the release rule out the first 24 overtime based on practical The calculation of the provisions should also be determining the party was to make employers and employees otherwise agreed or agreed upon by the calculation of overtime pay, legal basis. The proposal to extend the working time of reward was whether to change mining compensatory reference to foreign legal system, Germany, for instance, Germany Working Hours Act (Arbeitszeitgesetz) did not expressly stipulate wages, whether normal working hours or to extend the working hours of the salary compensation by employers and employees to contract, enterprise agreements or the most common groups treaty convention. Labor time working than positive long working hours, unless consent must apply for labor, usually also given additional remuneration agreed, "Overtime" are not necessarily in monetary benefits likely to increase by way of annual leave time (Freizeitausgleich) or reduce working hours instead. The law does not specify the payment method and content of the extension of the working hours return, as an extension of the remuneration of the working hours, generally for the courts to recognize compensation leave. Regardless of the manner in which payment of overtime to give the contents should be clear Practice common in Germany to include the extension of working hours, including the lump sum gross salary as a payment method for high-level employees who have administrative privileges, the court held that as long as the overtime The relationship between the number of reward did not apparently not quite (kein auffallendes Missverhältnis), that recognize the committed effective. Contain overtime lump sum salary payments, however, may not necessarily be applied to high-level employees who have administrative privileges applicable to the general employee-employer relationship Convention (Überstundenpauschalierungsabrede), the German Federal Labor Court pointed out that the entire salary, including overtime convention corresponding to the remuneration of its normal work and extended working time, labor is no way to be known with certainty, because of a lack of clarity, the courts usually reject its effectiveness. Since our doctrine common in overtime of discourse context the various allowances whether wage Study, a lot of research on the concept and scope of the wage, but directly or monograph of the legal nature of Article 24 of the Labor Standards Law, especially this section. " the concept of weekdays wages, and Article 2, paragraph 3, of the Labor Standards Act wage concept is fully consistent with the "average wage" What is the difference between the relative lack of related research. Therefore, that the point of contention as the papers of the inquiry points. In addition, the court decision is often not subject to the Labor Standards Law 84-1 except workers calculated the relevant provisions and principles of the Labor Standards Law, working hours and delay wages, aid for non workers in Article 84-1 of the Labor Standards Law, such as passenger transport industry, and its work is unique, so as long as the total base pay and delay wages not less than the basic wage, the difficulty is not incompatible with the law. Regardless of the applicable provisions 84-1 of the Labor Standards Law working hours except to exclude 24 of the Labor Standards Law, employers and employees agree otherwise the overtime calculation standard, single explore the industry in terms of its nature, is not the case, so both need to be clarified. 
Relation: 科技部, NSC102-2410-H033-032, 10208 ~ 10307
Data Type: report
Appears in Collections:[勞工研究所] 國科會研究計畫

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
index.html0KbHTML22View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing