| In recent years, labor dispute has increasingly been a focus involving wide social concern ranging from government organizations to NGOs, from academic research to media report, from theorists to professional workers. More and more individuals and organizations participate in the study of labor dispute with complicate and confusing charm. They conduct the research from diversified disciplines and different theoretical perspectives, with different interest tendencies and value objectives in various methods and degrees. Undoubtedly, Law experts and professional legal workers are the most enthusiastic group and attached greatest attention among all the people and organizations mentioned above. Thanks to their endeavor, the labor dispute settlement mechanism has become a nascent research area and a lot of research findings have come into being rapidly. However, due to too rapid development of the field and people's eager desire for finding out and solving the problems with labor dispute, and the excessively rapid development of knowledge related to it, the process of creating knowledge on labor dispute is replete with anxious, adventurous and immature characters. The articles with rigorous logic and self-established structure are difficult to find out like reform projects which can weather careful tests. With close scrutiny of these reform plans or proposals, the author discovers that: (1) their merits are not more than their demerits; and almost every merit cannot withstand careful analysis. (2) The core problem they want to solve relates to preempt of arbitration procedure. But regarding this problem, completely different understandings could be concluded from the perspectives of public law or private law. Moreover, since the labor law has the characteristics of both public law and private law, the opposite understandings can be explained endlessly, and cannot reach agreement. (3) The foundation of their theories is based on the text analysis of the law system of labor dispute settlement, but in fact, the problem involves the mechanism of labor dispute settlement in both system and institution levels. (4) They pay less attention to implement environment of the system, especially to the related systems. (5) For being unable to understand the traits of labor dispute, the related research is short of special interest and theoretical foundation demanded for the mechanism of labor dispute settlement. (6) Few people have not yet made an overall and scientific analysis on existing mechanism of labor dispute settlement and its operation, which certainly serves as the knowledge foundation of all the reform proposals. Obviously, it is impossible to find way out according to the current research method. The author believes that the only way to change the present situation is to do research on inter-disciplines.The essay focuses its study on the mechanism of labor dispute settlement in China. It stresses analysis and evaluation on the existing mechanism of labor dispute settlement and its status quo operation. It conducts empirical study with the inter-discipline information, by taking advantage of methods of both hermeneutic of law text and empirical investigation and statistical analysis method. The overall study program is as follows: First of all, this dissertation tries to establish a set of analysis frame in order to conduct an all-around evaluation on the mechanism of labor dispute settlement in China; It also make great effort to design a set of investigation projects to obtain the materials concerning the operation of the mechanism of labor dispute settlement; Additionally, it attempts to get all the knowledge of operation environment of the mechanism of settlement of labor dispute by reading various literatures. Afterwards, to analyze and evaluate the mechanisms and operation situation of labor dispute settlement of three institutions such as enterprise mediation committee, labor arbitration committee and court from three aspects of mechanism, institutions and environment by using the above analysis frame, investigation materials and related literatures. Finally, the dissertation makes concrete analysis on various existing reform proposals and presents its own reform proposals according to its understanding of the existing mechanism of labor dispute settlement and the analysis frame it designs.The dissertation includes six chapters. Chapter One is introduction. Firstly, the author describes the status quo and traits of labor dispute and its settlement in China, and then introduces the situation and limitations of the existing study. Accordingly, the author presents his own study object, and recommends his theoretical basis, study method, research process.Chapter Two is theoretical part of this dissertation. The first section of this chapter describes the respective merits and demerits of the formal settlement procedure in court and informal settlement procedure out of court, and makes comparison and analysis on them. Finally the author discovers that: (1) the settlement procedures in court and out of court cannot be easily evaluated which is more advantageous or not. The difference rests with the types of labor dispute applicable to different handling ways and the preference of acceptance of the settlement procedures. It, in the opposite, explains that it is wise to take into sufficient account of the functions of the informal mechanism of labor dispute settlement. In comparison to the existing mechanism of labor dispute settlement, most current reform proposals appear short-sighted for disregarding this point; (2) With regard to close social relations, "Konfliktsnahe" (conflict approaching) is an effective way to solve conflicts and maintain social relations. Hereby, informal procedures are more applicable to the labor dispute cases, which to some extent accounts for the reasonability to give priority to mediation in the current handling mechanism of labor dispute; (3) To accept or to prepare to accept the procedures of labor dispute settlement becomes the legitimate foundation of the procedures themselves. Under the environments of unsound substantive labor law in China, it is particularly of instruction significance. The first part of the second section introduces the traits of labor dispute and its internal requirements for labor dispute settlement, and points out that the deficiency of the existing labor law is essentially the systematic defect. The second part analyzes the significance of informal norms like enterprise internal culture to regulate labor relation, and furthermore stresses the importance and need of the handling mechanism of labor dispute in the informal level especially in the enterprise level; The third part introduces the essential conditions to meet the informal settlement mechanism of labor dispute in academic field, and makes conclusions in four aspects such as procedural justice, substantive justice, institutions and enforcement of constitutional laws. Eventually, after comparing, analyzing, referring to and generalizing the measuring indicators of formal and informal procedures from Falke and Gessner, Rottreuthner, Schmidt and Bierbrauer, the dissertation designs the quality analysis criteria on the models of labor dispute settlement in China.In Chapter Three, the author conducts analysis on the system of enterprise labor dispute mediation committee by the quality analysis criteria concluded in Chapter Two, and stresses the conflict and gap between system design and realistic demand, and then analyzes and summarizes the operation environment of enterprise mediation committee system by using the investigation and second-hand materials. On the basis of that, the author introduces and analyzes some reform measures and development trend of the enterprise mediation committee system of labor dispute. The author finds out the transform of our enterprise mediation committee system, and that the new paradigm is not the western pattern that the western liberalists anticipate. Executive power expands rapidly under the support of "the Tripartite Principle" and the pragmatism. Through systematic analysis, we would draw such a conclusion: inside enterprise, the enterprise mediation committee system has become weakened due to the lack of power restriction and balance mechanism regulating labor relationships. Furthermore, under the precondition that the self-governing labor union cannot be revitalized in short term, the enterprise mediation institution can find a new way only when it relies on the outside administration force. The new way probably depends on the establishment of grassroots organizations in administrative mediation system on labor dispute.Chapter Four continues to conduct overall analysis on the labor dispute arbitration system by using the quality analysis criteria on the paradigm of labor dispute settlement. The author then analyzes the operation environment, operation status and the existing problems in labor arbitration system by using investigation materials and literature materials. Considering its special position between court and enterprise mediation committee, and its processing capacity with formal and informal settlement functions, the author attaches great importance to how it operates and how it fix its position between its double roles. Various tentative reforms in different places provide useful materials for better understanding the deficiency of existing arbitration system and for observing its development trend. Therefore, the local reforms also have become the author's concern. The focuses in this chapter involve arbitrators' legal quality, institution establishment of arbitration committee and its functional differentiation and the implementation way of "the Tripartite Principle". Finally, the author points out that although the labor dispute arbitration committee has made great achievements till now, it has to solve the problem with administrative attachment and that with related position-fixing contradiction; Under the precondition that in a short term, executive power do not loosen supervision and administration over increasingly sensitive labor dispute, to find a way out, the labor dispute arbitration committee either continues to be substantiated to become formal administrative law enforcement institution, or realize the internal function differentiation by using the position-fixing contradiction: Part of its functions continue to be administerized and part of those de-administerized, and eventually develop into a mixed system.Chapter Five analyzes the problems which civil court is confronted with as a formal mechanism of labor dispute settlement by using the quality analysis criteria on the paradigm of labor dispute settlement. The author discovers that two core problems embarrass court to conduct trials of labor dispute cases. They are legal system deficiency and establishment stagnancy of professional institutions. Due to absence of procedural law, courts have to use civil procedural law to conduct trials concerning labor dispute. Thus, the most serious consequence resulted from procedural law absence is that it is impossible to realize substantive justice. The establishment stagnancy of professional institutions is unfavorable not only to cultivate judges, but also helpless to carry out "the Tripartite Principles" in the labor dispute trial organizations. On the basis of the discussion mentioned above, the author conducts a case study by using the materials gathered in X city to analyze the practical situation where courts settle the labor dispute. Finally, the author compares arbitration institutions with courts in labor dispute settlement from different perspectives such as settlement methods, procedure criteria, judge's capability, working and work styles. In addition, since court is becoming more and more important in labor dispute settlement, the dissertation analyzes other issues such as judges' law quality, the adaptability of civil procedural law to settlement of labor dispute and the feasibility of "the Tripartite Principle" in court procedures.Basically, the dissertation has finished the evaluation of the mechanism of labor dispute settlement and its operation situation through the analysis in the last three chapters:(1) While there are various problems with the actual mechanism of labor dispute settlement, it is generally effective; either arbitration institution or court has no independent capacity to settle all the cases concerning labor dispute in the near future.(2) The contradiction between system design and realistic demand can be explained reasonably only by taking into account the three elements like the system itself, institution establishment and its operation environment. Therefore, it is unscientific and inadvisable to conclude macroscopical reform proposals merely by analyzing the system through text interpretation; the workload transfer among the settlement institutions of labor dispute is resulted from the three elements interacting one another, not from the sole element of system itself.(3) The institution establishment (including two parts of individuals and institutions; and the two aspects of quality and quantity) stagnancy is the uppermost restriction factor in hindering the mechanism of labor dispute settlement. Furthermore, the factors restricting the development of various institutions are different.(4) The influence of operation environment of the settlement mechanism of labor dispute, especially which of the status quo and change tendency of related systems and institutions on the system establishment of labor dispute settlement and the mechanism operation is beyond people's imagination. For example, to some extent, the decline of the enterprise mediation committee system is primarily caused by the decay of trade union. Thus, various related systems and comprehensive operation environment must be taken into account in coming reform of labor dispute settlement system.(5) Less cooperation among related institutions and inconvenient personnel transfer among the similar institutions not only squanders judicial resources but also hampers institutions to cooperate with one another to improve of efficiency and quality of the whole settlement mechanism of labor dispute. In other word, the operation capacity of the whole mechanism still has the potential to improve, which must be given priority to solve in recent reform.(6) There are lots of factors that influence the settlement of labor dispute; at least through comparing the result of arbitration institutions with that of courts in labor dispute settlement, it is impossible to prove the normalization degree of institutions and that of operation procedure can directly influence the quality of the labor dispute settlement quality.(7) The main institutions of labor dispute settlement have taken the similar reform path of normalization: the enterprise mediation institution attempts to be administerized, the arbitration institution to be and the court to be professionalized. While the professionalization of courts is above reproach, the normalization of labor mediation and arbitration institutions actually tends to deny the informal settlement principles of labor dispute, which does not accord with the special demand of labor dispute.These conclusions in return substantiate the deduction that the "quality analysis criteria of labor dispute settlement patterns" can meet the demand for all-around analysis of different modes of labor dispute settlement. Of course, further conclusions are far beyond these mentioned above.Chapter Six can be regarded as the supplementary conclusion. Firstly in this chapter, the author introduces main reform proposals about the labor dispute settlement system such as "twice-arbitration-model", "one-arbitration-trial-model", "either-arbitration-or-trial-model", "twice-trial-model", etc. and the proposal-presenters' defense reasons. Secondly, the dissertation analyzes and evaluates these reasons by taking into account others' study and the research conclusion drawn in the former chapters. Finally, after analyzing the further proposals presented by parties, lawyers, arbitrators and judges, the author presents his reform proposal: to perfect the existing mechanism of labor dispute settlement at the minimized reform cost it is better to differentiate arbitration functions, and to solve labor dispute cases more effectively.The author understands that the study in this essay is replete with risks: First of all, the topic is a bit broad, which is hard to handle. Secondly, on the one hand, abandoning the traditional study method in law would make him easily exposed to controversy. Moreover, at the same time, it is easy to lose the opportunity to use others' study achievements to the farthest degree for reference. Thirdly, due to short-term touch with the research method of sociology of law, the author cannot digest it completely. Therefore, the author has a relatively realistic expectation. That is, to do some basic research work, and provide useful materials and ideas for others' further study in the same filed.
|
PDF Full Text Request