Research On Several Issues Of Refusing To Pay Labor Compensation

The amendment 8 to the Criminal law deliberated and passed by the National People's Congress in 2011 would include the malicious refusal to pay the labor remuneration into the scope of criminal law to regulate it as a criminal act.The Supreme People's Court in 2013 issued a judicial interpretation of the crime of malicious refusal to pay the labor remuneration and clarified some of the disputed issues.It is intended to combat acts of malicious arrearage of salary in a punitive manner.This stipulation has the positive function in protecting the laborer's lawful rights and interests,promoting the enterprise to standardize the employment,maintaining the social harmonious stability and so on.However,the criminal law and the related judicial explanation has only prescribed the partial content of refusing to pay the labor remuneration,and the construction of the whole system still has many defects and ambiguities,which mainly manifest in the definition of“labourer”,“labor remuneration”,“ability to pay”,“government department”.Furthermore,the using methods and frequency of the crime should be limited.The use ratio(frequency)of penalty means in solving the dispute of labor compensation of workers and peasant workers directly determines the change ofthe main solution of the dispute,and the guiding significance of penalty means is higher than the crime itself.This paper will analyze some problems in the above aspects through case study,give suggestions and explanations to the relevant controversial content,aiming to help improve the judicial practice mechanism.This paper consists of three parts: introduction,main body,conclusion.The contents of the main body are as follows:The first part of the body is the general information of the three cases,such as Hu Kejin.First of all,from the perspective of basic case,the adjudication of Court,the focus of controversy,the paper gives an brief introduction of the three typical cases respectively,and raises some questions about the three cases.The second part is the analysis and research on criminal jurisprudence problems involved in the above three cases.By using combined method of theory analysis and case study,the author not only gives concrete concept definition of the questions proposed in the first part,but also gives detailed and clear explanations in the light of some practices in related cases and practices.The third part is about the revelation drawn from the threetypical cases.Through the relevant theoretical analysis of three cases in this paper,the author puts forward some opinions and suggestions to improve the relevant legislation of our country.The opinions and suggestions are as follows: the definitions of “labourer” and “remuneration for labor” should be clear,the cognizance of “capable of paying but refuse to pay” should be reasonable and “government ordered” in the procedure of predecessor should be improved.