Return to search

求職者個人資訊保障之研究 / A Study on the Protection of Job Applicants’ Informational Privacy

雇主在招募過程中,為了提高企業的生產力或行政組織的效率,防免契約、侵權責任的發生,必須謹慎挑選人才,因此通常會以詢問或檢測(如人格測驗)盡量蒐集與求職者相關的資訊,來遴選合適員工。但是,雇主得要求應徵者揭露多少資訊?求職者在雇主的要求下,為了提高獲聘的機會,是否只能拋棄個人的隱私利益?這些疑惑均值得思考,從中也顯現出了雇主與求職者間利益衝突的問題。
關於求職者個人資訊的保障,我國目前的基本規範為「個人資料保護法(簡稱個資法)」及「就業服務法(簡稱就服法)第5條第2項第2款」。雇主如欲蒐集求職者的個資,除必須符合個資法的特定條款外,假若涉及隱私資訊,尚須通過就服法第5條第2項第2款「就業所需」的檢驗。
在這看似簡明的基本架構中,事實上存有許多令人困惑的地方,以個資法特定條款的蒐集事由為例,如:「執行法定職務必要範圍內」的意涵具體所指為何;「與當事人有類似契約之關係」是否包含雇主可請求當事人以外的第三人(如:前雇主)協助為履歷調查;以及「經當事人同意」在勞動關係不對等時其有效性的爭議等。而就服法第5條第2項第2款最讓人頭痛之處則為應如何詮釋「就業所需」。是以,我們須要更多的實務及學說見解來填充個資法與就服法勾勒出的雇主與求職者間利益權衡框架。
本文將先探討雇主通常是基於什麼考量而對求職者為哪些詢問及檢測;而應徵者面對這些詢問及檢測往往會有什麼憂慮。接著借鏡美國法制,剖析我國針對求職者個人資訊保障的判準,並關注在個資法修正與就服法第5條第2項第2款增訂後,過往的實務見解是否依舊恰當或有所革新。最後比較美國與我國法制的異同,提出檢討與建議,期望能在保障求職者個資的同時,也兼顧到雇主的利益。 / In the hiring process, employers need to select workers cautiously in order to improve the productivity and efficiency of their enterprises, and to avoid the potential liability caused by reckless employees. To screen out the best possible candidate for a particular job, employers usually wish to gather as much information about job applicants as possible by making oral or written inquiries, or conducting different kinds of employment tests (such as personality tests).
However, what kind of information can employers legally require job applicants to disclose? Do job applicants have no choice but to relinquish their personal privacy if they want to be employed? To answer these questions, we need to carefully balance the competing interests between employers and job applicants.
In Taiwan, “Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA)” and “Employment Service Act (ESA) §5II②” form the basic framework of protecting job applicants’ informational privacy. Employers need to obey specific provisions of the PIPA before they can collect job applicants’ information; and if private information is to be collected, employers should further confirm their collecting actions meet the “job-related” requirement specified by §5II② of the ESA.
This legal framework seems simple and clear, but there are many questions remain to be answered. For example, what is the exact scope of the term “within the scope of job functions provided by laws and regulations” of the PIPA? Does the condition “quasi-contractual relationship between the Parties” specified in PIPA allow employers to contact third parties (such as job applicants’ former employers) and conduct a reference check? Further, since there is a serious power-imbalanced problem in the employment relationship, can we truly expect the job applicants to offer a free and valid consent when they are requested to provide their personal information? Last but not the least, what is the precise meaning of the term “job-related” of §5II② of the ESA? More studies and court judgments are needed to delineate the boundaries between what employers are entitled to know and what job applicants should be able to keep private.
This thesis begins with analyzing why employers need/hope to gather information about job applicants and what screening tools they prefer to use. It then discusses job applicants’ concerns when they face employers’ inquiries or employment tests. By comparing relevant U.S. legislation and judicial decisions regarding the protection of job applicants’ informational privacy, this thesis examines the standards used in Taiwan’s case-law when balancing employers’ and job applicants’ interests. Special attentions are paid to the issue whether these standards are still appropriate or should be updated in light of the latest amendments to the PIPA and ESA. Finally, through concrete cases, this thesis tries to provide practical recommendations on how we can better protect job applicants’ privacy while respecting employers’ legitimate interests in knowing their future employees.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0100651011
Creators詹岱蓉, Jan, Day Rong
Publisher國立政治大學
Source SetsNational Chengchi University Libraries
Language中文
Detected LanguageEnglish
Typetext
RightsCopyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders

Page generated in 0.0025 seconds