資方不利行為與勞方爭議行為之禁止──勞資爭議處理法第8條實務爭議問題之探討

勞資爭議處理法第8條規定，勞資爭議在調解、仲裁或裁決等行政處理期間，資方不得因該勞資爭議事件而為不利於勞工之行為，勞方不得因該勞資爭議事件而為爭議行為。本文主要探討該條規定在實務上如何適用之問題。勞資爭議包括權利事項之勞資議與調整事項之勞資爭議，關於雇主在勞資爭議調解、仲裁或裁決期間，因終止勞動契約所生之爭議，仍有部分法院判決認為不屬於勞資爭議，是不依據法律文義的謬誤解釋，應予修正。該條規定之立法目的，一方面要求勞資雙方當事人擴張和諧之義務冷卻勞資爭議，另一方面是確保勞資爭議處理機制之有效運作。資方不得為之不利行為包括歇業、停工、終止勞動契約或為其他不利於勞工之行為；勞方被禁止的爭議行為包括：罷工、罷工糾察線、怠工、杯葛、廠場圍堵、廠場占據與新型態的爭議行為。罷工投票並非爭議行為，勞工集體的行使個別法上的權利，則是爭議行為。不利行為必須發生在勞資爭議調解、仲裁或裁決期間開始後與結束之前，在此期間之前或之後的行為並不受該條規定之限制；調解不成立後再行調解，或法院處理勞資爭議期間的不利行為同樣不受限制。資方的不利行為或勞方的爭議行為必須起因於勞資爭議事由，只要勞資爭議是導致資方不利行為或勞方爭議行為的因素（條件）之一，就可以認定為因該勞資爭議而起。若勞資爭議起因於資方之不利行為，特別是終止勞動契約之行為本身是勞資爭議的起因，並無該條規定之適用；若解僱勞資爭議發生後雇主另外以其他事由解僱勞工，或者是雇主變更不同的法定終止事由，則應受該條規定之限制。

Article 8 of the Act for Settlement of Labor Management Disputes stipulates that during administrative proceedings such as mediation, arbitration, or decision on unfair labor practices, the employer shall not impose adverse actions against employees due to the dispute, nor shall the employees initiate any labor dispute actions due to the same event. This article primarily explores the issues related to the application of this provision. Labor- management disputes encompass both disputes over rights and disputes over interests. However, certain judicial practice that excludes disputes arising from termination of employment contract during administrative proceedings from the scope of labor- management disputes misinterprets the law contrary to its textual meaning. Accordingly, these interpretations warrant correction. The legislative purpose of this provision is twofold: on the one hand, it imposes an obligation on both parties in a labor dispute to extend their duty to maintain peace, thereby de-escalating the conflict; on the other hand, it ensures the effective operation of the labor dispute resolution mechanism. Employers are prohibited from engaging in adverse actions, including shutdowns, work suspensions, termination of employment contracts, or other actions detrimental to employees. Employees, on the other hand, are prohibited from engaging in industrial actions, including strikes, picketing, slowdown, boycotts, factory blockades, factory occupation, and other new forms of industrial action. Strike voting does not constitute an industrial action, whereas the collective exercise of individual statutory rights by workers does qualify as one. Adverse actions must occur after the commencement and before the conclusion of these administrative procedures. Actions taken before or after this period are not subject to the restrictions set forth in this provision. Similarly, adverse actions occurring during a subsequent mediation following an unsuccessful initial mediation or during court proceedings handling the labor- management dispute are likewise not restricted. The adverse actions of the employer or the industrial actions of the employees must be caused by the labor- management dispute. It suffices that the labor- management dispute is one of the contributing factors (conditions). Where the labor-management dispute originates from the employer’s adverse actions—particularly termination of labor contracts—itself constituting the cause of the dispute, Article 8 is inapplicable. However, if the employer imposes a new ground for dismissal or alters the statutory basis for termination after a labor-management dispute arises, such action falls within the scope of the prohibition under Article 8.