Research On Over-aged Laborers Industrial Injury

Currently, with the increasing number of the aging problems, the overage personnel who are reemployed after retiring have been an irresistible trend. As a populous country, China base of elderly population is large and present the trend of fast growth. In view of compared to other countries, our country's legal and emeritus age is significantly lower, the phenomenon of overage worker reemployment is common in our country. However, the related mechanism, legislation and policy are not synchronized at the same time. The rights of overage employed labor have not been properly protected. Furthermore, the scope of application of the legislation which aims to protect labors include “labor law”, “labor contract law” and “Injury Insurance Regulation”, is beyond the overage personnel. How to solve these problems? Such as the overage workers whether can be an eligible labor or when the overage workers are being injured relevant to their job, whether it can be ascertained “industrial injury”. Opinions on that are varied from the academia to the practical circle. “Labor relations”, “special labor relations”, “Service relations” and “linked to social insurance” are the mainstream theory. In judicial practice, the judging standard of which the overage worker whether can be identified as “industrial injury” when they are being injured relevant to his job is also in dispute. The phenomenon of different judgments to the same case is relatively common.The overage workers who are a member of the workforce are a special group under this aging population trend. Based on the belongingness characteristics of labor relationship, the overage worker should be included in the applicable scope of object of the “labor law”, “labor contract law” and “Injury Insurance Regulation”. And they should be seemed as the proper labor. What should be really clear is that we cannot deny overage workers are suitable labors just because of statutory retirement age. Of course, we ought to identify it as “industrial injury” when they are being injured relevant to his job, even though they have received pension premiums or pension insurance benefits.Therefore, the overage worker, as a member of the workforce, in this case can be ascertained “industrial injury” when they are being injured relevant to his job in the process of work.In order to change the judicial dilemma of different judgments to the same case, making every citizen enjoy judicial fairness and justice, the related legislation should be unified. The issues that how to understand the relation between employer and overage employee need be regulated clearly and unified, so does the problem that when the overage employee are being injured relevant to his job, whether it can be ascertained “industrial injury”.