美国雇佣自由规则在判例法中的确立及启示
|
摘要
在修改《劳动合同法》呼声愈演愈烈的背景下,不少学者将目光投向美国雇佣自由规则。在目前主要的工业化国家中,仅有美国适用雇佣自由规则,其私人部门中的雇主一般可随时以任何理由解雇雇员。19世纪中期前,不同州的法院或同一州不同系统的法院或适用一年雇佣规则,或适用劳动报酬规则,或适用雇佣自由规则处理劳动争议。19世纪末20世纪初,雇佣自由规则在判例法中得以确立,是学术理论、法律制度、经济制度、社会观念、工会因素、司法体制综合作用之结果。借鉴美国经验可知,我国不宜适用过于宽松的解雇保护制度,应继续将稳定劳动关系作为主要价值目标,并遵循"社会公共利益>职业稳定权>经营管理权"之法益保护位阶。
Along with increasingly appealing for amending Labor Contract Law,many scholars focus on U.S. employment at-will rule. U. S. is the only nation carrying out employment at-will rule in most industrialized countries,namely,in private sector employers can terminate employment for any reason at any time without causing any negative legal consequences. Before the 1950 s,rules adopted by courts in different states or in the same state but belonging to different systems varied. Some courts applied annual hiring rule,some applied rate of pay rule and some adopted employment at-will rule to handle labor disputes. At the turn of the 20 thcentury,employment at-will rule has been established due to comprehensive reasons including academic theories, legal institutions, economic systems, social ideas, union elements and judicial bureaucracy. Based on American experience,it is arguable that unduly loose termination protection institution may not suit China. To improve termination protection institution,China should place stable employment relations as its main legal purpose and defer the following order: social public interests,employees ' job security,and employers' management right.
Along with increasingly appealing for amending Labor Contract Law,many scholars focus on U.S. employment at-will rule. U. S. is the only nation carrying out employment at-will rule in most industrialized countries,namely,in private sector employers can terminate employment for any reason at any time without causing any negative legal consequences. Before the 1950 s,rules adopted by courts in different states or in the same state but belonging to different systems varied. Some courts applied annual hiring rule,some applied rate of pay rule and some adopted employment at-will rule to handle labor disputes. At the turn of the 20 thcentury,employment at-will rule has been established due to comprehensive reasons including academic theories, legal institutions, economic systems, social ideas, union elements and judicial bureaucracy. Based on American experience,it is arguable that unduly loose termination protection institution may not suit China. To improve termination protection institution,China should place stable employment relations as its main legal purpose and defer the following order: social public interests,employees ' job security,and employers' management right.
引文
[1] Timothy H. Heinsz. The Assault on the Employment at Will Doctrine:Management Considerations[J]. Missouri Law Review,1983,48(4):862.
[2]杨浩楠.论我国解雇保护制度的不足与完善——基于中美解雇保护制度的比较研究[J].上海财经大学学报,2016(1):99-100.
[3]董保华.“隐蔽雇佣关系”研究[J].法商研究,2011(5):116.
[4]董润青.中美劳动者保护立法的模式比较及思考[J].河北法学,2009(10):195.
[5]谢增毅.劳动法上经济补偿的适用范围及其性质[J].中国法学,2011(4):105-106.
[6]沈同仙.论完善我国不当解雇的法律救济措施[J].中国法学,2012(6):104.
[7]王显勇.经济补偿金制度:坚持、放弃抑或改良[J].中国劳动,2015(6):55.
[8]胡立峰.美国劳动法对雇主不当解雇行为的规制:源流、发展与反思[J].环球法律评论,2009(1):130-135.
[9]韩铁.美国法律对劳工自由流动所加限制的历史演变——“自由资本主义阶段”之真实性质疑[J].美国研究,2009(2):66-73.
[10] Deborah A. Ballam. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule Revisited:A Challenge to Its Origins as Based in the Development of Advanced Capitalism[J]. Hofstra Labor Law Journal,1995,13(1):105.
[11] J. Peter Shapiro, James F. Tune. Implied Contract Rights to Job Security[J]. Stanford Law Review,1974,26(2):340.
[12] William Blackstone. Commentaries on the Law of England[M]. Chicago:Callaghan and Co.,1872:425.
[13] Jay M. Feinman. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule[J]. The American Journal of Legal History,1976,20(2):119-120.
[14]Mayer G. Freed,Daniel D. Polsby. The Doubtful Provenance of Wood's Rule Revisited[J]. Arizona State Law Journal,1990,22(3):557.
[15] Deborah A. Ballam. The Traditional View on the Origins of the Employment-at-will Doctrine:Myth or Reality[J]. American Business Law Journal, 1995, 33(1):5.
[16] Sanford M. Jacoby. The Duration of Indefinite Employment Contracts in the United States and England:An Historical Analysis[J]. Comparative Labor Law&Policy Journal,1982,5(1):108.
[17] James Schouler. A Treatise on the Law of the Domestic Relations:Embracing Husband and Wife,Parent and Child,Guardian and Ward,Infancy,and Master and Servant[M]. Boston:Little Brown,1874:607.
[18] Andrew P. Morriss. Exploding Myths:An Empirical and Economic Reassessment of the Rise of Employment At-Will[J]. Missouri Law Review,1994,59(3):681.
[19] Horace Gay Wood. A Treatise on the Law of Master and Servant:Covering the Relation, Duties and Liabilities of Employers and Employees[M]. N. Y.:J. D.Parsons,Jr,1877:272.
[20]Thomas Childs Cochran,William Miller. The Age of Enterprise:A Social History of Industrial America[M].New York:Harper&Row,1961:325-336.
[21] Robert H. Wiebe. The Search for Order:1877-1920[M]. New York:Hill and Wang,1967:19.
[22] Paul H. Douglas. Real Wages in the United States, 1890-1926[M]. Boston:Houghton Mifflin,1930:391.
[23] Paul Marlor Sweezy. The Theory of Capitalist Development:Principles of Marxian Political Economy[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1942:56.
[24] Jay M. Feinman. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule Revisited[J]. Arizona State Law Journal,1991,23(3):736.
[25] Philip Selznick. Law, Society and Industrial Justice[M]. New York:Russell Sage Foundation,1969:135.
[26] James Willard Hurst. Law and the Conditions Of Freedom in the Nineteenth Century United States[M].Madison:University of Wisconsin Press,1956:14.
[27] Philip Atiyah. An Introduction to the Law of Contract[M]. Oxford:Clarendon Press,1961:3.
[28] Claude D. Rohwer. Terminable-At-Will Employment:New Theories for Job Security[J]. Pacific Law Journal,1984,15(3):759-760.
[29]Walter Olson. The Trouble with Employment Law[J]. Kansas Journal of Law&Public Policy,1999,8(3):32.
[30] Matthew W. Finkin. The Bureaucratization of Work:Employer Policies and Contract Law[J]. Wisconsin Law Review,1986,1986(4):733-734.
[31] Clyde W. Summers. Individual Protection against Unjust Dismissal:Time for a Statute[J]. Virginia Law Review,1976,62(3):484-485.
[32]Kelly McWilliams. The Employment Handbook as a Contractual Limitation on the Employment at Will Doctrine[J]. Villanova Law Review,1986,31(1):351-352.
[33]托克维尔.论美国的民主[M].董良果,译.北京:商务印书馆,1989:4.
[34]Jurgen Kocka. White Collar Workers in America,1890-1940:A Social-Political History in International Perspective[M]. Beverly Hills:Sage Publications,1980:135-136.
[35]David Brody. Radical Labor History and Rankand-File Militancy[J]. Labor History,1975,16:117-126.
[36]F. J. Stimson. Handbook to the Labor Law of the United States[M]. New York:Charles Scribner's Sons,1896:181.
[37] Edwin E. Witte. The Government in Labor Disputes[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill Book Company,Inc.,1932:213.
[38] Clyde E. Jacobs. Law Writers and the Courts[M]. Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press,1954:76-78.
[39]Richard A. Epstein. In Defense of the Contract at Will[J]. Chicago Law Review,1984,51:955.
[40] Joan M. Krauskopf. Employment Discharge:Survey and Critique of the Modern at Will Rule[J]. UMKC Law Review,1983,51(4):191.
[41] Andrew P. Morriss. Bad Data,Bad Economics,and Bad Policy:Time to Fire Wrongful Discharge Law[J].Texas Law Review,1996,74(7):1922.
[42] Note. Protecting Employees at Will against Wrongful Discharge:The Public Policy Exception[J].Harvard Law Review,1983,96(8):1934-1935.
[43]Peter Stone Partee. Reversing the Presumption of Employment at Will[J]. Vanderbilt Law Review,1991,44(3):707.
[44]Kenneth R. Swift. The Public Policy Exception to Employment at Will:Time to Retire a Noble Warrior[J].Mercer Law Review,2010,6(2):554.
[45]董学智.经济法实施之差序格局的逻辑演绎及中国经验[J].西南政法大学学报,2016(5):66.
[46]杨浩楠.完善我国解雇保护法律制度的思路与对策——基于中美解雇保护机制的比较[J].法学,2016(3):65-68.
[47]王全兴.社会法学的双重关注:社会与经济[J].法商研究,2005(1):15.评论
(1)参见:OECD. Strictness of Employment Protection Legislation:Individual and Collective Dismissals[EB/OL].[2017-05-10]. http://www. oecd-ilibrary. org/employment/data/employment-protection-legislation/strictness-of-employment-protectionlegislation-individual-and-collective-dismissals_data-00658-en? is Part Of=/content/datacollection/lfs-epl-data-en.
(1)需要指出的是:第一,美国大多数集体劳动合同禁止雇主实施任意解雇行为,但私人部门中雇员加入工会的比例现已低于8 %,故雇佣自由规则适用于私人部门中的绝大部分雇员;第二,20世纪中期以来,成文法和判例法逐步加大了对雇佣自由规则的限制,但整体而言,雇佣自由规则仍是美国劳动关系的起点;第三,雇佣自由规则不适用于公共部门,联邦法规规定:仅当存在提高公共部门雇员效率的理由时,才能解雇公共雇员。(参见:5 U. S. C.§7503(a)(1970).)
(2)19 世纪中期前,美国和英国劳动关系运行的经济社会背景差异主要体现在土地资源供给、劳动力供给以及社会扶贫压力方面。(参见:Deborah A. Ballam. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule Revisited:A Challenge to Its Origins as Based in the Development of Advanced Capitalism[J]. Hofstra Labor Law Journal,1995,13(1):105-106.)
(3)参见:Statute of Labourers,23 Edw. III,c. 1(1349).
(1)参见:Magarahan v. Wright,10 S. E. 584(Ga. 1889).
(2)参见:Harper v. Hassard,113 Mass. 187(1873).
(3)参见:Butler v. Smith,35 Miss. 457,464(1858).
(4)参见:Ward v. Ruckman,34 Barb. 419,420(N. Y. App.Div. 1861).
(5)参见:Payne v. Western&Atl. R. R.,81 Tenn. 507-520(1884).
(1)参见:Martin v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.,148 N. Y. 117(1895).
(2)伍德著作的相关内容见本文第四部分。
(3)参见:Jagau v. Goetz,32 N. Y. S. 144(Com. Pl. 1895).
(4)参见:Douglass v. The Merchants’Ins. Co.,118 N. Y. 484(1890).
(5)在Martin v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.案判决后的20年内,纽约州法院大约审理了30起劳动期限争议案件。在近2/3的案件中,纽约州上诉法院严格遵循雇佣自由规则,拒绝考虑任何其他外部因素。(参见:Jay M. Feinman. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule[J]. The American Journal of Legal History,1976,20(2):128-129.)
(6)参见:Adair v. United States,208 U. S. 161(1908).
(7)《艾德曼法》第10条规定:“黄狗合同”是违法的,雇主不得因雇员参加工会而将其解雇。
(1)参见:Martin v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.,148 N. Y. 117(1895).
(2)参见:Cuppy v. Stollwerck Bros.,216 N. Y. 591(1916).
(1)参见:Beeston v. Collier,4 Bing. 309,311,(1827).
(1)参见:U. S.,Laws 1898,c. 370.
(2)参见:Adair v. U. S.,208 U. S. 161(1908).
(3)参见:Coppage v. Kansas,136 U. S. 1(1915).
(4)参见:Boyer et al. v. Western Union Tel. Co.,124 Fed.246,248(1903).
(1)参见:Smith v. St. Paul&Duluth R. R.,62 N. W. 392(Minn. 1895).
(1)参见:Petermann v. Teamsters Local 396,344 P. 2d 25(Cal.Ct. App. 1959).
(2)参见:Monge v. Beebe Rubber Co.,114 N. H. 130,316 A.2 d 549(1974).
(3)参见:Reuther v. Fowler&Williams,Inc.,255 Pa. Super.28 ,386 A. 2d 119(1978).
(1)参见:Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.,27 Cal. 3d 167,610 P. 2d 1330,164 Cal. Rptr. 839(1980).
(2)关于雇佣自由规则发展进程的论述,请参见:杨浩楠.美国雇佣自由规则发展进程剖析及其启示[J].南京大学法律评论,2016(2):311-324.
(1)劳动关系中承载的社会公共利益主要以“社会发展、社会稳定和社会公正”为表现形式。
(2)关于我国解雇保护制度社会本位回归的相关论述,请参见:杨浩楠.完善我国解雇保护制度的路径选择[J].法学,2018(6):165-168.
[2]杨浩楠.论我国解雇保护制度的不足与完善——基于中美解雇保护制度的比较研究[J].上海财经大学学报,2016(1):99-100.
[3]董保华.“隐蔽雇佣关系”研究[J].法商研究,2011(5):116.
[4]董润青.中美劳动者保护立法的模式比较及思考[J].河北法学,2009(10):195.
[5]谢增毅.劳动法上经济补偿的适用范围及其性质[J].中国法学,2011(4):105-106.
[6]沈同仙.论完善我国不当解雇的法律救济措施[J].中国法学,2012(6):104.
[7]王显勇.经济补偿金制度:坚持、放弃抑或改良[J].中国劳动,2015(6):55.
[8]胡立峰.美国劳动法对雇主不当解雇行为的规制:源流、发展与反思[J].环球法律评论,2009(1):130-135.
[9]韩铁.美国法律对劳工自由流动所加限制的历史演变——“自由资本主义阶段”之真实性质疑[J].美国研究,2009(2):66-73.
[10] Deborah A. Ballam. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule Revisited:A Challenge to Its Origins as Based in the Development of Advanced Capitalism[J]. Hofstra Labor Law Journal,1995,13(1):105.
[11] J. Peter Shapiro, James F. Tune. Implied Contract Rights to Job Security[J]. Stanford Law Review,1974,26(2):340.
[12] William Blackstone. Commentaries on the Law of England[M]. Chicago:Callaghan and Co.,1872:425.
[13] Jay M. Feinman. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule[J]. The American Journal of Legal History,1976,20(2):119-120.
[14]Mayer G. Freed,Daniel D. Polsby. The Doubtful Provenance of Wood's Rule Revisited[J]. Arizona State Law Journal,1990,22(3):557.
[15] Deborah A. Ballam. The Traditional View on the Origins of the Employment-at-will Doctrine:Myth or Reality[J]. American Business Law Journal, 1995, 33(1):5.
[16] Sanford M. Jacoby. The Duration of Indefinite Employment Contracts in the United States and England:An Historical Analysis[J]. Comparative Labor Law&Policy Journal,1982,5(1):108.
[17] James Schouler. A Treatise on the Law of the Domestic Relations:Embracing Husband and Wife,Parent and Child,Guardian and Ward,Infancy,and Master and Servant[M]. Boston:Little Brown,1874:607.
[18] Andrew P. Morriss. Exploding Myths:An Empirical and Economic Reassessment of the Rise of Employment At-Will[J]. Missouri Law Review,1994,59(3):681.
[19] Horace Gay Wood. A Treatise on the Law of Master and Servant:Covering the Relation, Duties and Liabilities of Employers and Employees[M]. N. Y.:J. D.Parsons,Jr,1877:272.
[20]Thomas Childs Cochran,William Miller. The Age of Enterprise:A Social History of Industrial America[M].New York:Harper&Row,1961:325-336.
[21] Robert H. Wiebe. The Search for Order:1877-1920[M]. New York:Hill and Wang,1967:19.
[22] Paul H. Douglas. Real Wages in the United States, 1890-1926[M]. Boston:Houghton Mifflin,1930:391.
[23] Paul Marlor Sweezy. The Theory of Capitalist Development:Principles of Marxian Political Economy[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1942:56.
[24] Jay M. Feinman. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule Revisited[J]. Arizona State Law Journal,1991,23(3):736.
[25] Philip Selznick. Law, Society and Industrial Justice[M]. New York:Russell Sage Foundation,1969:135.
[26] James Willard Hurst. Law and the Conditions Of Freedom in the Nineteenth Century United States[M].Madison:University of Wisconsin Press,1956:14.
[27] Philip Atiyah. An Introduction to the Law of Contract[M]. Oxford:Clarendon Press,1961:3.
[28] Claude D. Rohwer. Terminable-At-Will Employment:New Theories for Job Security[J]. Pacific Law Journal,1984,15(3):759-760.
[29]Walter Olson. The Trouble with Employment Law[J]. Kansas Journal of Law&Public Policy,1999,8(3):32.
[30] Matthew W. Finkin. The Bureaucratization of Work:Employer Policies and Contract Law[J]. Wisconsin Law Review,1986,1986(4):733-734.
[31] Clyde W. Summers. Individual Protection against Unjust Dismissal:Time for a Statute[J]. Virginia Law Review,1976,62(3):484-485.
[32]Kelly McWilliams. The Employment Handbook as a Contractual Limitation on the Employment at Will Doctrine[J]. Villanova Law Review,1986,31(1):351-352.
[33]托克维尔.论美国的民主[M].董良果,译.北京:商务印书馆,1989:4.
[34]Jurgen Kocka. White Collar Workers in America,1890-1940:A Social-Political History in International Perspective[M]. Beverly Hills:Sage Publications,1980:135-136.
[35]David Brody. Radical Labor History and Rankand-File Militancy[J]. Labor History,1975,16:117-126.
[36]F. J. Stimson. Handbook to the Labor Law of the United States[M]. New York:Charles Scribner's Sons,1896:181.
[37] Edwin E. Witte. The Government in Labor Disputes[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill Book Company,Inc.,1932:213.
[38] Clyde E. Jacobs. Law Writers and the Courts[M]. Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press,1954:76-78.
[39]Richard A. Epstein. In Defense of the Contract at Will[J]. Chicago Law Review,1984,51:955.
[40] Joan M. Krauskopf. Employment Discharge:Survey and Critique of the Modern at Will Rule[J]. UMKC Law Review,1983,51(4):191.
[41] Andrew P. Morriss. Bad Data,Bad Economics,and Bad Policy:Time to Fire Wrongful Discharge Law[J].Texas Law Review,1996,74(7):1922.
[42] Note. Protecting Employees at Will against Wrongful Discharge:The Public Policy Exception[J].Harvard Law Review,1983,96(8):1934-1935.
[43]Peter Stone Partee. Reversing the Presumption of Employment at Will[J]. Vanderbilt Law Review,1991,44(3):707.
[44]Kenneth R. Swift. The Public Policy Exception to Employment at Will:Time to Retire a Noble Warrior[J].Mercer Law Review,2010,6(2):554.
[45]董学智.经济法实施之差序格局的逻辑演绎及中国经验[J].西南政法大学学报,2016(5):66.
[46]杨浩楠.完善我国解雇保护法律制度的思路与对策——基于中美解雇保护机制的比较[J].法学,2016(3):65-68.
[47]王全兴.社会法学的双重关注:社会与经济[J].法商研究,2005(1):15.评论
(1)参见:OECD. Strictness of Employment Protection Legislation:Individual and Collective Dismissals[EB/OL].[2017-05-10]. http://www. oecd-ilibrary. org/employment/data/employment-protection-legislation/strictness-of-employment-protectionlegislation-individual-and-collective-dismissals_data-00658-en? is Part Of=/content/datacollection/lfs-epl-data-en.
(1)需要指出的是:第一,美国大多数集体劳动合同禁止雇主实施任意解雇行为,但私人部门中雇员加入工会的比例现已低于8 %,故雇佣自由规则适用于私人部门中的绝大部分雇员;第二,20世纪中期以来,成文法和判例法逐步加大了对雇佣自由规则的限制,但整体而言,雇佣自由规则仍是美国劳动关系的起点;第三,雇佣自由规则不适用于公共部门,联邦法规规定:仅当存在提高公共部门雇员效率的理由时,才能解雇公共雇员。(参见:5 U. S. C.§7503(a)(1970).)
(2)19 世纪中期前,美国和英国劳动关系运行的经济社会背景差异主要体现在土地资源供给、劳动力供给以及社会扶贫压力方面。(参见:Deborah A. Ballam. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule Revisited:A Challenge to Its Origins as Based in the Development of Advanced Capitalism[J]. Hofstra Labor Law Journal,1995,13(1):105-106.)
(3)参见:Statute of Labourers,23 Edw. III,c. 1(1349).
(1)参见:Magarahan v. Wright,10 S. E. 584(Ga. 1889).
(2)参见:Harper v. Hassard,113 Mass. 187(1873).
(3)参见:Butler v. Smith,35 Miss. 457,464(1858).
(4)参见:Ward v. Ruckman,34 Barb. 419,420(N. Y. App.Div. 1861).
(5)参见:Payne v. Western&Atl. R. R.,81 Tenn. 507-520(1884).
(1)参见:Martin v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.,148 N. Y. 117(1895).
(2)伍德著作的相关内容见本文第四部分。
(3)参见:Jagau v. Goetz,32 N. Y. S. 144(Com. Pl. 1895).
(4)参见:Douglass v. The Merchants’Ins. Co.,118 N. Y. 484(1890).
(5)在Martin v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.案判决后的20年内,纽约州法院大约审理了30起劳动期限争议案件。在近2/3的案件中,纽约州上诉法院严格遵循雇佣自由规则,拒绝考虑任何其他外部因素。(参见:Jay M. Feinman. The Development of the Employment at Will Rule[J]. The American Journal of Legal History,1976,20(2):128-129.)
(6)参见:Adair v. United States,208 U. S. 161(1908).
(7)《艾德曼法》第10条规定:“黄狗合同”是违法的,雇主不得因雇员参加工会而将其解雇。
(1)参见:Martin v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.,148 N. Y. 117(1895).
(2)参见:Cuppy v. Stollwerck Bros.,216 N. Y. 591(1916).
(1)参见:Beeston v. Collier,4 Bing. 309,311,(1827).
(1)参见:U. S.,Laws 1898,c. 370.
(2)参见:Adair v. U. S.,208 U. S. 161(1908).
(3)参见:Coppage v. Kansas,136 U. S. 1(1915).
(4)参见:Boyer et al. v. Western Union Tel. Co.,124 Fed.246,248(1903).
(1)参见:Smith v. St. Paul&Duluth R. R.,62 N. W. 392(Minn. 1895).
(1)参见:Petermann v. Teamsters Local 396,344 P. 2d 25(Cal.Ct. App. 1959).
(2)参见:Monge v. Beebe Rubber Co.,114 N. H. 130,316 A.2 d 549(1974).
(3)参见:Reuther v. Fowler&Williams,Inc.,255 Pa. Super.28 ,386 A. 2d 119(1978).
(1)参见:Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.,27 Cal. 3d 167,610 P. 2d 1330,164 Cal. Rptr. 839(1980).
(2)关于雇佣自由规则发展进程的论述,请参见:杨浩楠.美国雇佣自由规则发展进程剖析及其启示[J].南京大学法律评论,2016(2):311-324.
(1)劳动关系中承载的社会公共利益主要以“社会发展、社会稳定和社会公正”为表现形式。
(2)关于我国解雇保护制度社会本位回归的相关论述,请参见:杨浩楠.完善我国解雇保护制度的路径选择[J].法学,2018(6):165-168.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |