疫情防控中如何平衡两类生存权  

How to Balance Two Kinds of Survival Rights in Epidemic Prevention and Control

作　　者：董保华 Dong Baohua

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学法学院,上海200241 [2]中国社会法研究会

出　　处：《探索与争鸣》2020年第4期118-128,289,共12页Exploration and Free Views

摘　　要：新冠肺炎疫情防控中出现了两种类型的劳动政策,分别为用人单位生存权"双保护"与劳动者生存权"单保护"两种类型。从立法逻辑到司法逻辑,两类生存权往往有相对固定的发展轨迹。在灾难面前,当"劳动者生存权的立法逻辑-企业生存权的司法逻辑"的历史,演变为"企业保员工-国家保企业"的现实,"单保护"的思维惯性再次受到了挑战。对生存权理论的正本清源,以及积极权利、消极权利的恰当定位,有必要从不可抗力的角度理顺生存权涉及的各种关系。特殊逻辑应当融入一般逻辑,固化为制度建设,否则,零和博弈处理不好很容易转向倒闭的负和博弈。复工之际,当务之急,法律应当重新释放市场空间,国家也有必要从化解市场风险的角度介入。There are two types of labor policies in epidemic prevention and control,which are respectively reflected in the protection of the right to survival of enterprises and workers.From the legislative logic to the judicial logic,the two kinds of survival rights often have a relatively fixed development track.It is necessary to straighten out all kinds of relations involved in the right to exist from the perspective of force majeure in order to clear the source of the right to exist theory,as well as the proper positioning of positive rights and negative rights.The special logic should be integrated into the general logic and solidified into the system construction.At present,the law should release the market space again,and it is necessary for the state to intervene from the perspective of resolving market risks.

关 键 词：劳动者生存权 用人单位生存权 积极权利 消极权利 不可抗力 

分 类 号：D922.5[政治法律—民商法学]