지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In employment relations, the employer's directions should be based on employment contracts. Even though employment contracts are valid between the employee and the employer, the directions have a legal limit. Employer's directions should be regulated by general legal principles, such as fairness and good faith. Thus, I intend to explore the legal base, internal restrictions and legal principles in relation to the employer's directions in this dissertation.
Employer's directions cannot be directly inferred from employment relations nor from social positions, but rather are based on employment contract as contract rights. As the employee and the employer make the contract, the employer could have the authority to direct the employee's work and the employee should have the obligation to follow the directions. Consequently, the employer's directions can unilaterally determine the contractual contents of an employee's duty to work at one's own discretion as a part of the responsibilities of the employee. Because it is a discretionary power against the employee in employment relations, the employers' directions need essentially to be limited on justice.
Above all, the employer's directions could be limited to equality in power to specify the terms of the employment contract, the employees' self-determination and equal treatments in employment conditions. Furthermore, it should be under the control of constitutional rights, legislations, collective agreement, workplace rules, employment contracts and industrial practices.
One needs to consider three stages when looking at the limit of the employer's directions. First, it explores the mind of both parties by the interpretation of the employment contract. If the implicit and explicit agreements can be certified, the employer's directions should be excluded in employment relations. Second, it compares the employer's interest with the employee's interest on the contents of employer's directions. If employer's directions have the potential to violate the objective and common interest of the employee, the directions should be legally denied. Third, the principle of fairness and good faith can be applied in exercising the directions. It needs to compare the management necessities of the company from the position of the employer with the employee's disadvantages in the workplace and also the personal losses of their family life as specific as possible.
Employer's directions cannot be directly inferred from employment relations nor from social positions, but rather are based on employment contract as contract rights. As the employee and the employer make the contract, the employer could have the authority to direct the employee's work and the employee should have the obligation to follow the directions. Consequently, the employer's directions can unilaterally determine the contractual contents of an employee's duty to work at one's own discretion as a part of the responsibilities of the employee. Because it is a discretionary power against the employee in employment relations, the employers' directions need essentially to be limited on justice.
Above all, the employer's directions could be limited to equality in power to specify the terms of the employment contract, the employees' self-determination and equal treatments in employment conditions. Furthermore, it should be under the control of constitutional rights, legislations, collective agreement, workplace rules, employment contracts and industrial practices.
One needs to consider three stages when looking at the limit of the employer's directions. First, it explores the mind of both parties by the interpretation of the employment contract. If the implicit and explicit agreements can be certified, the employer's directions should be excluded in employment relations. Second, it compares the employer's interest with the employee's interest on the contents of employer's directions. If employer's directions have the potential to violate the objective and common interest of the employee, the directions should be legally denied. Third, the principle of fairness and good faith can be applied in exercising the directions. It needs to compare the management necessities of the company from the position of the employer with the employee's disadvantages in the workplace and also the personal losses of their family life as specific as possible.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
Ⅱ. 사용자 지시권의 개념
Ⅲ. 사용자 지시권의 기능
Ⅳ. 사용자 지시권의 내재적 한계와 제한
Ⅴ. 사용자 지시권의 단계별 제한방법
Ⅵ. 결론
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
사용자의 지시에 대한 근로자의 대응과 그 효과
강원법학
2008 .06
-
집단적 노동관계법에서 사용자 책임의 확대―간접고용을 중심으로―
노동법학
2004 .12
-
사용자의 개념정립과 그 확장범위에 관한 법적 연구
노동법포럼
2013 .04
-
간접고용하의 부당노동행위 사례와 보호방안
노동법논총
2010 .08
-
사내도급 고용관계에서 부당노동행위 책임 - 미국 공동사용자 원리와 비교
노동법포럼
2017 .07
-
미국 연방노동법의 공동고용 원리에 관한 연구
노동법학
2010 .03
-
미국 교섭단위제도에서 사업장내 파견ㆍ용역근로자의 단체교섭권 연구
노동법학
2011 .06
-
공동사용자 개념과 논의의 한국적 함의
노동법포럼
2018 .02
-
미국의 임차근로자의 법적 지위
노동법논총
2011 .04
-
기업 간 전출 시의 징계권 행사에 대한 고찰
법학연구
2019 .08
-
부당노동행위 유형별 사용자의 개념 - 사용자 개념의 외부적 확대를 중심으로
노동법포럼
2011 .10
-
멀티잡 종사자의 노동법적 규제
노동법연구
2019 .09
-
기간제 근로계약 갱신 거절권의 제한
노동법연구
2008 .03
-
노동법상 근로자ㆍ사용자 개념 확대를 둘러싼 쟁점과 입법적 과제
노동법학
2014 .03
-
학력위조와 근로계약의 효력
노동법학
2009 .03
-
사용자책임에 관한 미국 판례의 동향
외법논집
2014 .01
-
미국법상 해고제한의 원리로서 계약이론
기업법연구
2006 .09
-
부당 해고에 대한 보통법적 책임
기업법연구
2003 .03
-
파견법 상 직접고용의무를 둘러 싼 법적 쟁점 재검토
노동법논총
2018 .04
-
使用者責任과 求償權 및 逆求償權에 관한 考察
동아법학
2010 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-336-014707519