代扣工會會費相關爭議問題解析──最高行政法院104 年度判字第440 號判決之啟發

Analysis of Disputes Related to Check off -Comment on the Supreme Administrative Court 2015 Civil Judgement No. Tai-Shang 440

由工會會員所繳納的會費對於工會來說是其最主要的財源，而由於我國的工會多為企業工會，工會之會員同時也具有企業員工之身分，故通常在工會與雇主之間具有代扣工會會費之勞動習慣存在。然而，在勞資關係緊張之際，雇主有可能透過廢棄此勞動習慣之方式而影響工會之發展或運作，特別是在企業內有複數工會存在時更是如此。
本案為雇主在企業內有複數工會組織之際拒絕為原已存在之工會的會員代扣會費，但卻涉及了在程序面向上之繼續行為概念及對於裁決委員會裁量權限之承認外，最高行政法院也在實體上對於工會會員身分之變動與雇主代扣會費義務之關聯、代扣會費勞動習慣之形成、廢棄代扣會費之勞動習慣與不當勞動行為之構成、代扣工會會費與雇主中立維持義務之關係以及強制入會要求等諸多爭點進行論述，而有其意義與價值。故本文先就相關的爭點整理與分析我國目前之實務與學說發展而突顯本判決之特徵後，再透過對於日本法上相關問題的介紹與分析，檢視本判決之妥當性，以求更全面地考察涉及代扣工會會費之相關爭議。除了能作為將來解決之參考外，也期待能使我國的勞資關係更邁向正常化的發展。

The membership dues paid by union members constitute the primary source of income for the union. Since many of the unions in our country are corporate unions, union members also hold the status of employees within their respective enterprises. Therefore, it is common practice for employers to facilitate the check off. However, in times of tense labor-management relations, employers may choose to abandon this practice, potentially affecting the development or operation of the union, especially when multiple unions coexist within the same enterprise.
This case involves an employer refusing to check off for the existing union members in the presence of multiple union organizations within the enterprise. It raises issues related to the concept of continuing conduct in procedural terms and the recognition of the discretionary powers of the board for decisions on unfair labor practices. The Supreme Administrative Court has substantively discussed various contentious issues, demonstrating its significance and value. These include the correlation between changes in union membership status and the employer's obligation to check off, the formation of the practice of checking off, the relationship between checking off and the employer's duty of neutrality, as well as issues related to mandatory union membership requirements. Therefore, this article first organizes and analyzes the current practical and doctrinal developments in our country regarding the relevant issues. It highlights the characteristics of this judgment. Subsequently, through an introduction and analysis of related issues in Japanese law, it examines the appropriateness of this judgment, aiming for a more comprehensive investigation into disputes involving the deduction of union dues. In addition to serving as a reference for future resolutions, it is hoped that this effort will contribute to the normalization of labor-management relations in our country.