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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 노동법이론실무학회 노동법포럼 노동법포럼 제37호
- 발행연도
- 2022.11
- 수록면
- 153 - 193 (41page)
- DOI
- 10.46329/LLF.2022.11.37.153
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The social awareness of workplace bullying and harassment to prevent and eradicate it is rising according to enforced workplace harassment bans, such as the Labor Standard Act, amended in July 2019. However, there is no legal basis for the post-relief system and procedure for bullying and harassment damages in current laws that regulate workplace harassment, such as the Labor Standard Act. Since the enforcement of the law, many studies have emphasized the proactive prevention of workplace harassment. However, problems related to workplace harassment have continued to arise since the enforcement of the workplace harassment ban. Consequently, the need is increasing for the post-relief of victims due to workplace harassment.
Basically, workplaces autonomously render their judgments, responses, and actions regarding workplace bullying and harassment. However, if the dissatisfied party files a lawsuit in a judicial institution, quick relief and restoration should be provided to the victim by first preparing a post-judgment and remedial procedure in the administrative agency considering the money and time required for litigation. This will become an important issue in the workplace harassment ban system.
Correspondingly, this work examined the cases of Japan and Australia. Both countries’ legal systems regulate workplace harassment and a relief system. In Japan, workplace harassment is regulated under the Act on Comprehensively Advancing Labor Measures, Stabilizing the Employment of Workers, and Enriching Workers’ Vocational Lives. Furthermore, victims can receive post-relief through mediation from regional labor bureaus and regional labor relations commissions under the Act on Promoting the Resolution of Individual Labor-Related Disputes. Workplace bullying is also regulated in Australia under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and victims can seek post-relief through arbitration by the Fair Labor Commission.
Hence, the relief system and procedures for workplace harassment must be legislated. Moreover, the administrative relief system should be improved so that post-relief from workplace harassment can be achieved through administrative agencies, such as the Labor Relations Commission. In addition, it will be crucial for local employment and labor offices and labor inspectors to strengthen and reconsider their roles in redressing the damages caused by workplace harassment.
Basically, workplaces autonomously render their judgments, responses, and actions regarding workplace bullying and harassment. However, if the dissatisfied party files a lawsuit in a judicial institution, quick relief and restoration should be provided to the victim by first preparing a post-judgment and remedial procedure in the administrative agency considering the money and time required for litigation. This will become an important issue in the workplace harassment ban system.
Correspondingly, this work examined the cases of Japan and Australia. Both countries’ legal systems regulate workplace harassment and a relief system. In Japan, workplace harassment is regulated under the Act on Comprehensively Advancing Labor Measures, Stabilizing the Employment of Workers, and Enriching Workers’ Vocational Lives. Furthermore, victims can receive post-relief through mediation from regional labor bureaus and regional labor relations commissions under the Act on Promoting the Resolution of Individual Labor-Related Disputes. Workplace bullying is also regulated in Australia under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and victims can seek post-relief through arbitration by the Fair Labor Commission.
Hence, the relief system and procedures for workplace harassment must be legislated. Moreover, the administrative relief system should be improved so that post-relief from workplace harassment can be achieved through administrative agencies, such as the Labor Relations Commission. In addition, it will be crucial for local employment and labor offices and labor inspectors to strengthen and reconsider their roles in redressing the damages caused by workplace harassment.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 국내법에서의 직장 내 괴롭힘 관련 구제수단
Ⅲ. 외국에서의 직장 내 괴롭힘 구제제도
Ⅳ. 논의 및 개선방안
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
직장에서의 괴롭힘의 법적 개념
이화젠더법학
2023 .05
-
직장 내 괴롭힘의 법적 개념과 요건
노동법학
2019 .03
-
일터 괴롭힘, ILO 협약과 국내 법규의 통합적 규율
노동법연구
2020 .09
-
직장 내 괴롭힘 법제화와 여성노동
이화젠더법학
2020 .05
-
การคุกคามในที่ทำงาน: ศึกษาเปรียบเทียบกฎหมายแรงงานเกาหลีและไทย
한국태국학회논총
2022 .02
-
직장에서의 괴롭힘 관련 법규에 대한 해석론과 실무상 쟁점
노동법논총
2019 .08
-
직장 내 괴롭힘 대응·조치 체계 구축과 조직 문화의 개선 - 2021.10.14. 시행 개정법을 중심으로 -
노동법포럼
2021 .11
-
캐나다 퀘벡 주의 정신적 괴롭힘 금지법의 시사점
법학연구
2020 .03
-
직장내 괴롭힘의 ILO 협약과 권고에 관한 연구
노동법논총
2019 .12
-
직장 괴롭힘의 개념과 판단기준에 관한 판례법리
이화젠더법학
2018 .08
-
직장 내 괴롭힘 금지제도의 실태와 발전 과제 — 시행 3주년 실태조사 결과를 소재로 하여 —
사회법연구
2023 .04
-
직장 내 성희롱 피해와 사용자책임
홍익법학
2018 .01
-
’직장 내 괴롭힘’ 관련 개정법(안)에 대한 평가와 향후의 과제
노동법포럼
2018 .11
-
직장 내 괴롭힘에 관한 주요 실무문제에 대한 소고 : 회사의 가학적 인사관리 및 상급자에 의한 개인적 괴롭힘을 중심으로
법학평론
2017 .05
-
캐나다의 성적 괴롭힘 규율과 시사점
이화젠더법학
2019 .05
-
영국의 성차별적 괴롭힘의 규율
비교법연구
2021 .08
-
Prevention Strategies for Secondary Victimization of Sexual Harassment Victims in the Workplace
Journal of Safety and Crisis Management
2022 .02
-
비서직 종사자의 성희롱 인식과 피해경험 실태조사
비서·사무경영연구
2023 .06
-
Hotel Workers and Workplace Harassment : A Comparison of South Korea and Japan
Culinary Science & Hospitality Research
2017 .01
-
성적괴롭힘(성희롱)관련 법적 쟁점
노동법포럼
2018 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
T형 복합재료 기둥의 좌굴
이승식
,
백성용
한국철도학회 논문집
2006
.02
공공기관 민간위탁과 근로자파견 ○ 광주고등법원 2022. 9. 21. 선고 2021나24430 판결 ○ 광주지방법원 2021. 9. 2. 선고 2020가합52691 판결
장호진
노동법학
2022
.12
파견법상 직접고용 의무가 자회사 설립으로 이행되는지 여부 ○ 서울고등법원 2022. 9. 16. 선고 2021나2025265 판결
양승엽
노동법학
2022
.12
불법체류 외국인을 파견받아 사용한 경우의 법적 쟁점 ○ 울산지방법원 2022. 9. 30. 선고 2021고단2202 판결
노호창
노동법학
2022
.12
조합활동 중 거친 표현에 대한 모욕죄 인정여부와 단결권의 보장범위 ○ 대법원 2022. 10. 27. 선고 2019도14421 판결
김린
노동법학
2022
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2023-360-000141198