作　　者： ;

机构地区： 中山大学社会学与人类学学院城市社会研究中心

出　　处： 《开放时代》 2010年第9期37-45,共9页

摘　　要： 广东南海本田工人的罢工标志着农民工的利益诉求正从"底线型"利益向"增长型"利益转变。"底线型"利益受法规保护并有清晰的利益标准,"增长型"利益没有正式的法规保护和清晰的利益标准。"底线型"利益纠纷,个体可以通过仲裁和诉讼来解决,而"增长型"利益纠纷没有仲裁和诉讼的通道,只能依靠集体力量得到解决。虽然集体谈判日益成为解决"增长型"利益纠纷的机制,但是"谈判"只是实现"增长型"利益诉求的必要条件,并不当然地是充分条件,除非有"集体行动"的介入。建立社会主义市场经济下的劳资关系秩序,必须理清罢工的法律地位问题、罢工的权利边界问题、工会的组织效能问题。面对"底线型"利益纠纷,政府扮演的是监督者和执法者的角色,面对"增长型"利益纠纷,政府扮演的是协调者的角色。 The strike staged by the workers in the Honda manufactory in Guangdong represents a shift of the labour＇s appeal from safeguarding ＂bottom-line＂ benefit to seeking ＂incremental＂ benefit. Unlike ＂bottom-line＂ benefit which is under the protection of laws and regulations with well-defined criteria, ＂incremental＂ benefit has no such protection. Individuals seeking ＂bottom-line＂ benefit may find solution through arbitration or litigation, but they have no legal channels for claiming ＂incremental＂ benefit and have to resort to collective action. Although collective negotiation has become an increasingly important mechanism for solving the conflicts involving ＂incremental＂ benefit, negotiation itself is not sufficient without the threatening of industrial action. In order to establish order in industrial relations, it is necessary to clarify the legal status of and the rights for strike as well as the function of the union. In the conflicts regarding ＂bottom-line＂ benefit, the government plays the role of a supervisor and a law-enforcer, but when it comes to ＂incremental＂ benefit, the government can only serve as a coordinator.

关 键 词： 底线型 利益 增长型 利益 劳资关系秩序 罢工权 组织效能

领　　域： [政治法律] [政治法律]