我國性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任規定之檢討－以德國一般平等待遇法（AGG）為參照對象 | NCCU Academic Hub

Publications-NSC Projects

Article View/Open

pdf(258)

Publication Export

Google Scholar^TM

NCCU Library

Discovery System

Citation Infomation

No doi shows Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

Simple Record
Full Record

題名	我國性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任規定之檢討－以德國一般平等待遇法（AGG）為參照對象 A Review of the Employer $S Responsibility for Prevention and Correction of Sexual Harassment
作者	吳姿慧 Wu, Tzu-Hui
貢獻者	勞工所
關鍵詞	職場性騷擾;雇主防治義務;交換式性騷擾;敵意環境性騷擾;性騷擾防治措施 Prevention and Correction of Sexual Harassment;sexual nature;gender equality;gender discrimination as an exchange;Hostile environment sexual harassment
日期	2018-07
上傳時間	2022-03-29
摘要	我國性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任規定之檢討－以德國一般平等待遇法（AGG）為參照對象職場性騷擾（sexual harassment in the workplace；德文sexuelle Belästigung am Arbeitsplatz）所引發之爭議，一直是受人囑目之勞資關係課題。我國基礎法學繼受歐陸法特別是德國法制之架構，然性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任之立法則受美國法制相當之影響，因而關於美國甚至日本法之規範、判決歷程與學說見解，文獻相當豐富1，對於歐盟或是德國法－尤其是2006 年修正之德國「一般平等待遇法」（Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz; AGG）有關受僱者遭受職場性騷擾之規定與架構，論述則相對甚少2。本文即擬以德國法制之規定為研究重點，探討： 1. 德國「一般平等待遇法」將性騷擾明定為歧視之一種態樣（第3 條第4 項），我國性平法無類似之規定，且體系上將兩者於分立於性平法之第2 章及第3 章；雇主違反防治義務時，受僱者除得提出申訴外，民事責任亦分別依26 條（違反性別歧視）及第27、28 條（違反性騷擾防治）不同之法條請求救濟。然我國實務判決及學說均視性騷擾即為性別歧視之一種態樣，在現行法之體系下，如何解釋「性騷擾行為」即為一種「歧視」之類型，因而構成「性別歧視」？兩者之間存何關係？是本文思考之問題。 2. 對於因雇主違反防治義務，受僱者遭職場性騷擾受有損害時，德國以雇主違反契約之附隨義務/反射義務（Nebenpflicht/ Reaktionspflicht）作為雇主須負起民事上損害賠償責任之基礎，且為單獨責任；我國則使雇主須與行為人負連帶損害賠償責任，此項規定引發另一項思考：性平法主要課與雇主防治性騷擾義務，雇主違反義務致發生職場性騷擾，為何與行為人一起連帶負責？其「連帶性」之基礎為何？此項規定會否造成性平法之規範對象擴及於行為人，將行為人之個人責任亦納入其間？亦是本文思索之重點。此外，我國雇主實施性騷擾之防治措施，實際上遭遇許多困境，例如小規模之事業單為如何為立即有效之糾正或補救措施、行為人為雇主時，雇主自己如何立即為有效之補救措施等，亦為本研究一併檢討之重點。為探討上述問題，本研究認為須觀察我國立法歷程以及參照他國之經驗，研究摘要擬分三部分：一、性別工作平等法制定之前，職場發生性騷擾時，被害人向誰依何規定主張哪些權利救濟；二、性別工作平等法制定之後，職場發生性騷擾時，被害人之救濟方式又有哪些；三、問題之提出。 Sexual harassment in the workplace (sexuelle Belästigung am Arbeitsplatz) has been a controversial subject of labor relations.The basic law in Taiwan continues to be subject to the continental law, especially the German legal system. However, the legislation on the employer`s sexual harassment in the workplace is quite affected by the US legal system. Therefore, concerning the norms and judgments of the United States and Japanese law, is quite abundant, and there is relatively little discussion on the provisions and frameworks of the EU or German law - especially the 2006 amendment to the German General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz; AGG) on employment-related sexual harassment. This article explores: 1. The German General Equal Treatment Act defines sexual harassment as a form of discrimination (art. 3, para. 4), and there is no analogous provision in the Sexual Law of the People`s Republic of China, and the system places the two in a separate 2 and Chapter 3 of the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the employer is also required to file a petition in accordance with Article 26 (Sex Discrimination) and Article 27, 28 (Control of Sexual Harassment) Relief. Under the present law system, how to explain "sexual harassment" is a kind of "discrimination" type, which constitutes a "sex discrimination"? What is the relationship between the two? Is the problem of this paper. 2. In the case of injury to the employer in the course of sexual harassment in the workplace where the employer is in breach of the duty of prevention and control, the Employer shall bear the civil liability for damage to the Employer`s liability / And employers are responsible for sexual harassment, employers violate their obligations to workplace sexual harassment, the perpetrators and why the responsibility of the employer and the perpetrator jointly and severally liable for damages, this provision led to a thinking: Of the joint and several responsible? What is the basis of its "cohesion"? Will this rule result in the extension of the normative object of sexuality to the perpetrator and the incorporation of the individual responsibility of the perpetrator? Is also the focus of this paper. In addition, the prevention and treatment of sexual harassment by employers in China has encountered many dilemmas, such as how small-scale workplaces provide immediate and effective control or remedial measures, and how employers can take effective remedial measures immediately. The focus of this review. In order to explore the above problems, this study suggests that we should observe the legislative process of China and the experience of other countries. The research abstract is divided into three parts: First, ; Second, the Gender Equality Act, the workplace, sexual harassment, the victims of what relief; Third, the issue raised.
關聯	科技部, MOST106-2410-H033-030, 10608 ~ 10707
資料類型	report

dc.contributor	勞工所
dc.creator (作者)	吳姿慧
dc.creator (作者)	Wu, Tzu-Hui
dc.date (日期)	2018-07
dc.date.accessioned	2022-03-29	-
dc.date.available	2022-03-29	-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間)	2022-03-29	-
dc.identifier.uri (URI)	http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139497	-
dc.description.abstract (摘要)	我國性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任規定之檢討－以德國一般平等待遇法（AGG）為參照對象職場性騷擾（sexual harassment in the workplace；德文sexuelle Belästigung am Arbeitsplatz）所引發之爭議，一直是受人囑目之勞資關係課題。我國基礎法學繼受歐陸法特別是德國法制之架構，然性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任之立法則受美國法制相當之影響，因而關於美國甚至日本法之規範、判決歷程與學說見解，文獻相當豐富1，對於歐盟或是德國法－尤其是2006 年修正之德國「一般平等待遇法」（Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz; AGG）有關受僱者遭受職場性騷擾之規定與架構，論述則相對甚少2。本文即擬以德國法制之規定為研究重點，探討： 1. 德國「一般平等待遇法」將性騷擾明定為歧視之一種態樣（第3 條第4 項），我國性平法無類似之規定，且體系上將兩者於分立於性平法之第2 章及第3 章；雇主違反防治義務時，受僱者除得提出申訴外，民事責任亦分別依26 條（違反性別歧視）及第27、28 條（違反性騷擾防治）不同之法條請求救濟。然我國實務判決及學說均視性騷擾即為性別歧視之一種態樣，在現行法之體系下，如何解釋「性騷擾行為」即為一種「歧視」之類型，因而構成「性別歧視」？兩者之間存何關係？是本文思考之問題。 2. 對於因雇主違反防治義務，受僱者遭職場性騷擾受有損害時，德國以雇主違反契約之附隨義務/反射義務（Nebenpflicht/ Reaktionspflicht）作為雇主須負起民事上損害賠償責任之基礎，且為單獨責任；我國則使雇主須與行為人負連帶損害賠償責任，此項規定引發另一項思考：性平法主要課與雇主防治性騷擾義務，雇主違反義務致發生職場性騷擾，為何與行為人一起連帶負責？其「連帶性」之基礎為何？此項規定會否造成性平法之規範對象擴及於行為人，將行為人之個人責任亦納入其間？亦是本文思索之重點。此外，我國雇主實施性騷擾之防治措施，實際上遭遇許多困境，例如小規模之事業單為如何為立即有效之糾正或補救措施、行為人為雇主時，雇主自己如何立即為有效之補救措施等，亦為本研究一併檢討之重點。為探討上述問題，本研究認為須觀察我國立法歷程以及參照他國之經驗，研究摘要擬分三部分：一、性別工作平等法制定之前，職場發生性騷擾時，被害人向誰依何規定主張哪些權利救濟；二、性別工作平等法制定之後，職場發生性騷擾時，被害人之救濟方式又有哪些；三、問題之提出。
dc.description.abstract (摘要)	Sexual harassment in the workplace (sexuelle Belästigung am Arbeitsplatz) has been a controversial subject of labor relations.The basic law in Taiwan continues to be subject to the continental law, especially the German legal system. However, the legislation on the employer`s sexual harassment in the workplace is quite affected by the US legal system. Therefore, concerning the norms and judgments of the United States and Japanese law, is quite abundant, and there is relatively little discussion on the provisions and frameworks of the EU or German law - especially the 2006 amendment to the German General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz; AGG) on employment-related sexual harassment. This article explores: 1. The German General Equal Treatment Act defines sexual harassment as a form of discrimination (art. 3, para. 4), and there is no analogous provision in the Sexual Law of the People`s Republic of China, and the system places the two in a separate 2 and Chapter 3 of the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the employer is also required to file a petition in accordance with Article 26 (Sex Discrimination) and Article 27, 28 (Control of Sexual Harassment) Relief. Under the present law system, how to explain "sexual harassment" is a kind of "discrimination" type, which constitutes a "sex discrimination"? What is the relationship between the two? Is the problem of this paper. 2. In the case of injury to the employer in the course of sexual harassment in the workplace where the employer is in breach of the duty of prevention and control, the Employer shall bear the civil liability for damage to the Employer`s liability / And employers are responsible for sexual harassment, employers violate their obligations to workplace sexual harassment, the perpetrators and why the responsibility of the employer and the perpetrator jointly and severally liable for damages, this provision led to a thinking: Of the joint and several responsible? What is the basis of its "cohesion"? Will this rule result in the extension of the normative object of sexuality to the perpetrator and the incorporation of the individual responsibility of the perpetrator? Is also the focus of this paper. In addition, the prevention and treatment of sexual harassment by employers in China has encountered many dilemmas, such as how small-scale workplaces provide immediate and effective control or remedial measures, and how employers can take effective remedial measures immediately. The focus of this review. In order to explore the above problems, this study suggests that we should observe the legislative process of China and the experience of other countries. The research abstract is divided into three parts: First, ; Second, the Gender Equality Act, the workplace, sexual harassment, the victims of what relief; Third, the issue raised.
dc.format.extent	1124948 bytes	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.relation (關聯)	科技部, MOST106-2410-H033-030, 10608 ~ 10707
dc.subject (關鍵詞)	職場性騷擾;雇主防治義務;交換式性騷擾;敵意環境性騷擾;性騷擾防治措施
dc.subject (關鍵詞)	Prevention and Correction of Sexual Harassment;sexual nature;gender equality;gender discrimination as an exchange;Hostile environment sexual harassment
dc.title (題名)	我國性平法關於雇主職場性騷擾防治責任規定之檢討－以德國一般平等待遇法（AGG）為參照對象
dc.title (題名)	A Review of the Employer $S Responsibility for Prevention and Correction of Sexual Harassment
dc.type (資料類型)	report