工會會員資格與工會法上之勞工──以日本法借鏡

The Research on the Labor Union Membership and the Labor of the Labor Union Act: From the Comparative Perspective of Japan

勞動法令原則上以勞工為適用、保護之對象，然而，各勞動法令目的不盡相同，相較於以個別勞動契約關係為規範對象之勞動基準法，以保障集體勞動關係中勞工之勞動三權為目的之工會法等集體勞動法，其適用、保護之勞工可能應有所不同。事實上，日本法在實務上已確立前述區分個別勞動法上勞工與集體勞動法上勞工之立場，堪認為具有啟發性之比較法素材。本文在借鑑日本法之同時，亦釐清我國法律發展之脈絡，並彙整我國相關實務見解，指出關於我國勞動基準法上之勞工與工會法上之勞工本存在相異之理解。而日本法對於集體勞動法上勞工所採取之判斷基準具有得以作為參照之處的同時，應留意因法制上之不同，我國工會會員資格與工會法上勞工之相互關係與日本法有所不同，對於工會法中所稱「勞工」之理解亦產生影響。

In principle, labor laws only protect labors. However, each labor law has its own purpose. Compared with the Labor Standards Law, which mainly regulates individual employment contracts, Labor Union Act aims to protect labors’three basic labor rights in collective labor relations. Therefore, the labor of Labor Union Act may be different with the one of Labor Standards Law. In fact, Japanese law has established the position of distinguishing labor in individual labor law from labor in collective labor law, which can be regarded as a meaningful comparative material. Beside of Japanese law, this paper has also clarified the development of statutory laws and relevant opinions of administrative agency and the court in Taiwan, pointing out that the labor of Labor Standards Law and Labor Union Act are understanded differently. While Japanese law can be used as a helpful reference for the judgment standard of the labor of Labor Union Act, it should be noted that due to differences in statutory law, the relationship between trade union membership and the labor of Labor Union Act in Taiwan is different from that in Japanese law. It also affects the understanding of the term“labor”in the Labor Union Act.