文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：对协商解除劳动合同经济补偿金问题的探讨——兼议《劳动法》第二十八条之完善

英文题名：Labor Contract Negotiations on the Issue of Compensation——On the Perfection of Article 28 of the Labor Law

作者：刘金祥[1]

机构：[1]华东理工大学法学院,上海200237

年份：2006

卷号：21

期号：4

起止页码：74

中文期刊名：华东理工大学学报（社会科学版）

外文期刊名：Journal of East China University of Science and Technology：Social Science Edition

收录：国家哲学社会科学学术期刊数据库

基金：教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目"基于二元所有权架构的企业劳资关系研究"(批准号:06JA820012)的成果之一。

语种：中文

中文关键词：劳动合同;协商解除;协议离职;经济补偿金

外文关键词：Labor contract;Consultations lift;Separation agreements Economic compensation

摘要：劳动者提出协商解除劳动合同,用人单位是否应支付经济补偿金?在司法实践中,对此类案件的通常做法是,只要是协商一致解除,用人单位就应支付经济补偿金,而不问是谁提出。这类裁决在司法实践中已成为“通例”,学界也无异议。但笔者认为这是劳动立法的缺陷,对用人单位有失公允,在理论上和实践中也容易引起混乱,理应进行立法修改。笔者的观点是:劳动者主动协商解除劳动合同的,用人单位可以不支付经济补偿金;劳动者被动协商解除劳动合同的,用人单位应支付经济补偿金;本文通过下面的案例引出的话题进行探讨和论证,用以证明这一观点的成立。
If workers propose lifting labor contracts for consultations, should employers pay financial compensation？ In judicial practice, the usual practice in such cases, where there is a consensus to lift, employers should pay economic compensation, whoever proposed. It has become such a ruling ＂practice＂ that even academia has no objection. However, I think it is the labor legislation flaws and inequitable to the employing units. In theory and in practice, it is easy to cause confusion, so it should be changed. The author＇ s viewpoint is： if workers initiate labor contracts consultations, employers need not pay financial compensation; passive workers who enter into negotiations, employers should pay financial compensation.