公司重整程序最重要的目的是協助面臨經營或財務危機的公司，進行體質調整後，恢復正常營運狀態，公司能否重整成功，員工及公司內部人事組織就是很重要的關鍵。有鑑於近年來數家大型企業重整對於勞工所造成的影響，在公司法2018年修法時，立法者修正公司法第282條，賦予工會及一定比例的勞工具備聲請公司重整之權利，顯見立法者業已開始重視勞工權益保障，並且認為工會是得以協助勞工爭取權益之重要角色。工會利用罷工等手段與公司成立團體協約，該份團體協約內容涉及勞工之勞動條件事項，依照團體協約法之規定，會當然成為雇主與勞工之間勞動契約內容，因此，繼續有效存在之團體協約屬於具備濃濃勞動法性質之進行中雙務契約。參考美國聯邦破產法第365條對於一般進行中雙務契約之處理原則，賦予重整人得依照商業判斷法則決定「承受」或「拒絕」；然因團體協約需要同時考量勞工權益保障，美國聯邦破產法特別訂定第1113條，規範重整人在符合特定要件之前提下，得以拒絕履行團體協約，然該拒絕應該要經過法院認定，用以衡平公司重整利益與勞工權益保障。經查，我國目前公司法並未針對在公司重整程序中，明定在公司進行重整程序時，應如何處理雇主與工會間之團體協約，雖債務清理法草案已於第45條訂有類似美國聯邦破產法第365條之規範，然用語為「終止」或「解除」，似未有正面用語，故本文將參考美國法規，依據研究結果，對於債務清理法草案相關條款提出修正建議，並且希望藉此拋磚引玉，讓社會大眾更加重視公司重整程序中勞工權益保障問題。;The corporate reorganization process exists to help companies that are facing operational risks and financial crises to restructure. Both employees and the company’s own human-resources organizations are key determinants of whether the company can successfully reorganize. In the past few years, several large firms were reorganized, which affected all of their workers. In 2018, article 282 of the Company Act were amended, giving trade unions and a certain percentage of workers the right to apply for corporate reorganization. Legislators have been focused on labor rights and interests, in the belief that trade unions play an important role in helping workers fight for their rights. Trade unions use strikes and other means to establish collective bargaining agreement between workers and the company, and the contents of these agreements involve matters concerning the working conditions of employees. Under the provisions of the Collective Agreement Act, collective bargaining agreement will affect the content of labor contracts. Therefore, collective bargaining agreement that continue to be effective will increase the impact of labor law on mutual contracts. Referring to Section 365 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code for the handling of general ongoing dual obligations and contracts, the reorganizer may decide to “assume” or “reject” in accordance with the Business Judgment Rule. However, because the group agreement needs to consider the protection of labor rights and interests at the same time, the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code Section 1113 specifically stipulates that the reorganizer can refuse to perform the collective bargaining agreement provided that certain conditions are met. However, the refusal requires the courts to determine that the interests of the corporate reorganization are balanced against the protection of labor rights and interests. Upon investigation, Taiwan’s present Company Act does not specify how to deal with collective bargaining agreement between the employer and the trade union during the corporate reorganization process. Although Article 45 of the Debts Clearance Act has similar provisions to Section 365 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code, the terms "termination" or "discharge" do not seem to have positive equivalents. With reference to US regulations and based on research results, this paper will propose amendments to the relevant provisions of the draft Debts Clearance Act. It is hoped that this will increase public attention to the protection of labor rights and interests in the corporate reorganization process.
