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
The worker dispatch in China took place with having been begun the reform and opening. The original Temporary Agency Work system in China is following Labor Contract Law that was enforced from 2008. This is the first national legislation pertinent to the worker dispatch in China. At the 30th conference for the Standing Committee of the 11th National People"s Congress on December 28, 2012 after the enforcement of 「Labor Contract Law」 , the revised bill for 「Labor Contract Law」 was passed, thereby having taken effect from July 1, 2013.
Seeing the legal regulations and the revision process concretely regarding the permissible range of worker dispatch, the allowable range given the initial legislation was stipulated to be a division with less than 6 months for a term of existence in the range of “temporaryity, subsidiarity, substitutivity.” By the way, the ambiguity of the permitted limit to worker dispatch following the legislation led to a sharp increase in the worker dispatch. A law-making organ recognized that the ambiguity of the permitted limit to worker dispatch is one of a cause, thereby having come to make legal revisions. The revised law, which was enforced from July 1, 2013, rigidly conceded the permitted limit to worker dispatch just within the range of “temporaryity, subsidiarity, substitutivity,” thereby having reduced the scope of the worker dispatch. 「Provisional Regulations for the Dispatch of Workers」 quantified a company"s dispatched workers.
However, a demerit in which the permissible range of “temporaryity, subsidiarity, substitutivity” for the worker dispatch exists itself makes employee dispatchers and employment users inflict a loss on a legal right of dispatched workers because of disguising the worker dispatch with a method such as labor outsourcing, a personnel agent or out-tasking, thereby causing a bigger social issue. Also, the use of substitutivity task is leading to applying the worker dispatch in the long term.
Seeing the regulations of 「Act on the Protection, Etc. of Temporary Agency Workers」 in south Korea, the range of worker dispatch is limited to 26 target businesses and is available for the dispatch period up to 2 years. Given continuing to use a dispatched worker with exceeding 2 years in violation of this, it led to being defined as the employment of a dispatched worker from the next day of being expired 2 years. The definite industry regulations of worker dispatch drew the clear line in using dispatched workers. In addition, South Korea has even specific occupational classification rules in accordance with this. This application scope on worker dispatch in South Korea is regarded as a good legislation case pertinent to the permissible range of worker dispatch in China.
Seeing the legal regulations and the revision process concretely regarding the permissible range of worker dispatch, the allowable range given the initial legislation was stipulated to be a division with less than 6 months for a term of existence in the range of “temporaryity, subsidiarity, substitutivity.” By the way, the ambiguity of the permitted limit to worker dispatch following the legislation led to a sharp increase in the worker dispatch. A law-making organ recognized that the ambiguity of the permitted limit to worker dispatch is one of a cause, thereby having come to make legal revisions. The revised law, which was enforced from July 1, 2013, rigidly conceded the permitted limit to worker dispatch just within the range of “temporaryity, subsidiarity, substitutivity,” thereby having reduced the scope of the worker dispatch. 「Provisional Regulations for the Dispatch of Workers」 quantified a company"s dispatched workers.
However, a demerit in which the permissible range of “temporaryity, subsidiarity, substitutivity” for the worker dispatch exists itself makes employee dispatchers and employment users inflict a loss on a legal right of dispatched workers because of disguising the worker dispatch with a method such as labor outsourcing, a personnel agent or out-tasking, thereby causing a bigger social issue. Also, the use of substitutivity task is leading to applying the worker dispatch in the long term.
Seeing the regulations of 「Act on the Protection, Etc. of Temporary Agency Workers」 in south Korea, the range of worker dispatch is limited to 26 target businesses and is available for the dispatch period up to 2 years. Given continuing to use a dispatched worker with exceeding 2 years in violation of this, it led to being defined as the employment of a dispatched worker from the next day of being expired 2 years. The definite industry regulations of worker dispatch drew the clear line in using dispatched workers. In addition, South Korea has even specific occupational classification rules in accordance with this. This application scope on worker dispatch in South Korea is regarded as a good legislation case pertinent to the permissible range of worker dispatch in China.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 중국 근로자파견의 허용범위에 관한 규정
Ⅲ. 한국의 파견근로 허용범위에 대한 규정
Ⅳ. 개선안
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (12)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
파견법상 직접고용에서 쟁점과 해석 - 현대차사건의 판결을 중심으로 -
노동법포럼
2015 .07
-
전출과 근로자파견과의 관계
노동법포럼
2022 .07
-
위법파견 시 직접고용에 관련된 권리의 실효에 관한 연구
노동법포럼
2021 .11
-
허용되지 아니한 파견영역에서의 자발적 파견근로관계에 대한 형사처벌 가능성
형사법의 신동향
2015 .01
-
최근 일본 근로자파견법 개정 내용과 시사점
노동법논총
2015 .12
-
중국의 근로자파견제도의 문제점과 개선방안
원광법학
2019 .01
-
현행 ‘근로자파견 판단기준 지침’의 개선방안 연구 ―자동차 산업의 불법파견 판결 적용 사례를 중심으로―
노동법포럼
2022 .11
-
파견법 상 직접고용의무를 둘러 싼 법적 쟁점 재검토
노동법논총
2018 .04
-
派遣労働者の雇用実態と課題の韓日比較 -派遣業務と派遣期間を中心に-
한일경상논집
2017 .02
-
파견관계 판단기준의 재정립
노동법학
2024 .06
-
‘근로자파견성’ 판단 기준 재정립의 모색 - 판례에 대한 분석을 중심으로 -
노동법포럼
2019 .07
-
A Study on Family Based Dispatching Rules
한국산업경제학회 정기학술발표대회 초록집
2020 .12
-
파견근로자에 대한 사용사업주의 직접 고용의무 고찰
강원법학
2016 .06
-
도급과 파견의 구별에 관한 최근 판결의 동향과 쟁점 : 대상판결: 서울고등법원 2017.2.10. 선고 2014나49625 등(병합)
노동법논총
2017 .08
-
｢派遣｣という働き方の日本的特徴と課題
일본근대학연구
2016 .01
-
사무지원 파견근로자의 파견법 위반사례 방지를 위한 법정책적 방안
법과 정책연구
2020 .01
-
파견근로자의 직접고용 근로자 전환시 근로조건 결정 기준
노동법논총
2024 .12
-
노동법개혁의 과제와 전망
노동법학
2016 .09
-
파견과 다른 형태의 제3자 관련 노무공급에 관한 구별기준과 법적 문제
법학연구
2018 .01
-
전출과 근로자파견
노동법포럼
2020 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0