勞工職業災害保險及保護法第66、67條之相關爭議問題初探──從臺灣高雄地方法院111年度勞訴字第179號民事判決談起

A Preliminary Study on the Controversial Issues Related to Articles 66 and 67 of the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act

我國勞工職業災害保險及保護法除設有職業災害保險之相關規定外，並整併職業災害勞工保護法之規定，積極協助職業災害勞工重返職場，以建構包含職業災害預防、補償及重建之完善保障制度。同法第66條規定職災勞工或雇主得申請擬訂復工計畫，第67條並課以雇主依復工計畫協助勞工恢復原工作或安置適當工作之義務，若有違反，雇主除了要面對行政罰之不利益外，尚有勞工可以此為由終止勞動契約並請求資遣費之問題。則復工計畫之擬訂，不僅是政府依災保法所執行之重建服務的一環，對勞資雙方的權益保障與勞動契約之終了也會有所影響。再者，職災勞工的醫療期間如何認定，除涉及雇主勞基法第59條醫療補償與工資補償給付義務之認定，從雇主或勞工可否要求復工之觀點而言，也是至關重要的爭議。本文試圖藉由判決評釋探討現行法中可能出現的問題，以及日後適用上應注意之事項。

The Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act in Taiwan not only includes provisions related to occupational accident insurance but also consolidates regulations from the Act for Protecting Worker of Occupational Accidents. It actively assists workers who have suffered occupational accidents in returning to the workforce, aiming to establish a comprehensive protection system that includes accident prevention, compensation, and rehabilitation. Article 66 of the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act stipulates that workers or employers may file applications with professional, functional rehabilitation institutions to help them prepare a work reinstatement plan. Article 67 imposes an obligation on employers to assist workers in resuming their original work or arranging suitable work according to the work reinstatement plan. If violated, employers face administrative penalties, and workers may terminate the labor contract and request severance pay on this basis. Therefore, the formulation of a work reinstatement plan is not only part of the government’s rehabilitation services but also affects the rights and interests of both workers and employers. Furthermore, how the medical period for workers who have suffered occupational accidents is determined is crucial for recognizing the employer’s obligations under Article 59 of the Labor Standards Act concerning medical and wage compensation. This is also a significant issue from the perspective of whether employers or workers can request a return to work. This article attempts to explore possible issues in the current law through case reviews and to highlight points that should be noted in future applications.