1995年_教师法及1999年行政程序法实施以来.docVIP

摘要1995年教師法及1999年行政程序法實施以來, 學校與教師雖是契約聘僱關係, 但學校居於優勢的權力支配地位, 仍任意侵犯教師的基本權益, 甚或惡意解聘教師, 教師職位並未因教師等法通過, 而獲有更具體的保障。2000年初, 台灣人口結構失衡, 政治經濟生態迴異以往, 其直接衝擊是中、小學減班裁員, 超額教師被迫各地遷徙, 教師所面臨的不續聘壓力, 前所未見, 而法治國所要求「程序正義」的程序文化, 包括程序性正當程序及實質性正當程序, 則未受到應有的重視, 甚至在行政訴訟案中, 亦不受行政法院所維護。實則, 教師職責在傳播其所確信的知識, 陶冶啟迪學生的判斷力, 以形成其客觀的知識基礎, 性質與社會公益密切相關, 為求教師發揮專業自主性, 不受學校不正當的對待, 則毋論公、私立學校, 教師應有的工作權益, 自應受到高密度的保障, 教師所受到的職場規範, 亦應儘量求其合理寬容, 俾使教師得專心於教學研究。AbstractSince the enactment of the Teachers law in 1995 and the Administrative procedure law in 1999, and though the basis of the engagement relations of treaty, the school authority still often infringed the teachers rights even to dismiss through the preponderance of power. The teachers position was not promoted a little through the laws mentioned above. Especially in the dawn of 2000s, the population cut short and political-economical phenomena staggered, while the reduction in force resulted directly in the movement and dismissal of teachers. Meanwhile, the procedure culture required by the state by law, including the procedural due process and substantial due process were neglected by both of the administrative authority and the courts. True to say, the teachers purpose to bypass the assured knowledge, to evaluate the students judgment, and to formalize the basis of objective knowledge was highly relevant to the public welfares. Aimed to enhance professional autonomy, the rights of teachers in spite of the public or private school deserve high-density protection of law as well as process of law.關鍵字: 正當程序(due process)教師工作權(teachers right to work)教師評審委員會(committee of teachers evaluation)教師申訴(teachers grievance)教師解聘(teachers dismissal)壹、前言由於中國向為農業社會, 階層流動具有封閉性, 晉身仕宧的惟一途徑, 惟有經由識字、讀文、解義, 嗣明經以為政府取士, 造成社會傳統上有「士、農、工、商」的印象, 教師在中國社會所受尊崇, 由其位列「天、地、君、親、師」的五倫, 即可略窺其意, 教師甚至有國定節日(教師節), 由國家在當天牲祭以禮。韓愈文稱: 「師者, 所以傳道、授業、解惑也。」(師說), 正足以說明教師的角色期待, 不僅是道德的標竿, 專業知識的傳播者, 亦是生活的導師, 社會對於教師的角色塑造, 更多時候不是專業份子, 而是「崇高、無我、奉獻、犧牲」的如保如傅, 而教師亦不乏以此自期(秦夢群,2003:209), 長久以往, 造成校園以倫理而不以法律, 教師以義務而不以權利。然而,