| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 法律學系法律專業組 === 107 === Since Taiwan introduced the Disadvantageous Modification of Japanese academic opinions about work rules , if the modification has reasonableness could be binding labor. Employers may want to establish uniform working rules with most workers. Therefore, this study adopts stereotyped contractual insights on the nature of rational work rules. In practice, the employer may establish the same contractual content as the laborer, taking the minimum service years of Article 15 of the Labor Standards Act as an example. If a minimum service agreement is established with a finalized contract, it may become a working rule. Therefore, employers may set a minimum service period based on the rules of work. This paper is intended to explore the minimum service life with work rules, and its changes may have the working rules occurs disadvantageous modification, which is reasonable and restrictive against the labor theory. The rationality review benchmark in reasonableness of Disadvantageous Modification is the subject of this paper.
The reviewing of rationality of the Disadvantageous Modification is case-by-case. At the practical level, employers unilaterally set minimum service years and change effectiveness based on work rules. This part is not described deeply in the content. This paper summarizes the changes in the minimum service years by the minimum service years in practice. In this way, we discuss the possible reasons and circumstances of the change in the number of years in the working rules if the employer sets the minimum service period with the working rules.
The conclusions of this paper apply to the Labor Standards Act Articles 15-1, 70, and 71 in the working rules, when the minimum service agreement modified in disadvantages is carried out. If Disadvantageous Modification is not reasonable, the change is invalid. When performing the rationality review of Disadvantageous Modification, the necessity of the working rule about Disadvantageous Modification should be judged first. The necessity is based on Article 15 of the Labor Standards Act, and the practical principles are measured by the cost of training and the period. However, considering the minimum service period is for the technology training, the period of professionalism and technical development should be included in the judgment criteria whether the period is reasonable. Liquidated damages and training costs of Disadvantageous Modification make it possible to quantify the degree of non-interest. The reasonableness of the change in liquidated damages must be reasonable in the expectation of the benefits. Training costs should be measured in terms of training costs and training techniques.
|
|---|
