國民中小學教師罷教權之研究—全國教師會與全國家長團體聯盟之觀點

Abstract

本研究旨在探討國民中小學教師罷教權，以全國教師會與全國家長團體聯盟的觀點切入，研究方法以文獻探討與訪談法為主。 在文獻探討部份，探究罷教權之意涵、罷教權基本要件、人權與教育權理論、爭取罷教權面臨之爭議、英美日德法之罷教權政策；在訪談法部份，訪談全國教師會與全國家長團體聯盟有關罷教權之看法。 最後，依據前述之研究發現，提出本研究結論如下:(1)罷教權係為教師勞動基本權中爭議權之手段，教師勞動者身分與教師工會是行使罷教權的兩大基本要件(2)家長參與教育乃以保障學生學習受教權為根本(3)基於「兒童受教權之保護」與「法律具體規定優先適用」之原則，學生受教權之保障應優先於教師罷教權(4)英美日德法罷教權政策之特色(5)我國全國教師會認為教師不僅是廣義公務人員與專業人員，亦具有勞動者身分，故應得籌組教師工會，享有罷教權(6)我國全國家長團體聯盟認為教師僅為廣義公務人員與專業人員，不具備勞動者身分，故不得籌組教師工會及享有罷教權。倘若教師採用勞動者身分籌組工會，必須改適用勞動法規，放棄公務員身分所享有之權益(7)本研究認為教師除具備廣義公務人員、專業人員身分外，尚具有勞動者身分，故得以組織工會。惟基於兒童受教權之保障，我國現階段不宜開放罷教權，有關罷教權政策之作法建議參照日本與德國(8)教師若要籌組教師工會，應採自由入會制，且自行負擔會務假之代課教師鐘點費，並禁止成立學校層級的教師工會(9)在維護學生受教權前提下，教師若要享有罷教權，須與相關教育團體進行協商以達共識，並具備健全之協商爭議機制，提高同意罷教之投票門檻。根據研究結論，本研究提出建議藉供參考。

This research aims to investigate the strike perspectives of elementary school and junior high school teachers of National Teachers’ Association (NTA) R.O.C. and the National Alliance of Parents Organization (NAPO). The methodology adopted in this research is based on literature review and interviews. The literature review will highlight the definition of a teacher’s right to strike, the basic requirements of the right to strike, basic human rights and a child’s right to an education. In addition, the literature review will highlight the controversy when striving for teachers’ strike rights as well as the policies of teachers’ strike rights in England, America, Japan, Germany, and France. The second element of the methodology is based on interviews with teachers and parents of NTA and NAPO on the issue of teachers’ strike rights. Finally, the research draws on conclusions from prior research findings: (1) Teachers’ strike right is one of the rights to dispute in teachers’ three basic labor rights. Besides, labor status and teachers’ union are the basic requirements of the right to strike for teachers. (2)Parent Participation is to protect students’ right to education. (3)According to the principles of protecting children’s right to education and a concrete legal rule is priority to a general legal rule, students’ right to education has priority over teachers’ strike right. (4)The characteristics of teachers’ strike right policies of England, America, Japan, Germany, and France. (5)NTA advocates that teacher status is not only a general public official and a professional, but a laborer. As such, teachers can organize unions and have the right to strike. (6)NAPO advocates that teacher status is just a general public official and a professional, but not a laborer. As such, teachers cannot organize unions and do not have the right to strike. If teachers use labor status to organize unions, they shall change to adopt Labor Law and abandon rights and interests of public official status. (7)The researcher advocates that teacher status is not only a public official and a professional but a laborer. So teachers can organize unions. However, according to the principle of protecting children’s right to education, teachers must not be allowed to have the right to strike. And the government can also refer to policies of teachers’ strike right in Japan and Germany. (8)The minimum requirements of teachers’ unions are that the membership is based on a voluntary choice, and substitute teachers’ salary for official leave of absence should pay by teachers’ unions. In addition, the law must forbid having school teachers union. (9)For protecting students’ right to education, if teacher unions strike, they must bargain with other education groups to come to an agreement. Besides, a perfect collective bargaining system should be established and the vote percentage of agreement on carrying out teachers’ strike also needs to rise. This research offers a few suggestions to teachers, education groups, government institutes, and further researchers.