离职竞业限制违约金问题探究

目前,很多离职竞业限制合同没有约定给付劳动者补偿金,却约定了劳动者违反竞业限制义务时应承担的违约金责任,对于这样的违约金条款是否具有法律约束力存在激烈的意见分歧。我国现行立法对此未做明确的规定,一些地方为便于执法则做出了各自不同的规定,导致司法实践中的法律裁决也存在巨大的差异。从合同权利的性质、当事人的法律地位以及法律维护合同实质公平的角度来看,离职竞业限制合同应当无效,违约金责任也不具有法律效力。在现实经济活动中,已约定补偿金的离职竞业限制合同,几乎同时也约定了劳动者违反竞业限制义务时的违约金责任,一些合同在给予劳动者较低的补偿金的同时,却要求劳动者违约时须承担巨额的违约金。如此一来,该违约金应如何处理就成了这类案件争议的焦点。对此,应在立法上弥补相应的缺失,明确规定无补偿金条款时该离职竞业限制合同无效,则违约金条款也无须履行;对于已约定补偿金的,也应提出补偿金数额方面的强制性要求,并明确违约金可调整的样态。

On the Penalty of Post-employment Restraint

Nowadays many post-employment restraint agreements don''t appoint to pay compensation for the labour,but arrange the penalty liabilitywhen the labour infringes the obligation of post-employment restraint.There are serious disagreements on the legal force of the penalty clause.Ourcurrent laws don''t make definite provisions on this matter,and some local places produce different specification for executing the law,so it contributesto sharp differences of legal decision in judicial practice.From angles of the quality of contract rights,the legal position of the parties and that lawsmaintaining the substantive justice of the contract,post-employment restraint agreement should be invalid and the duty of penalty have not legal effectalso.The post-employment restraint agreements already appoint compensation,almost at the same time arrange the penalty when the labour infringesthe obligation of post-employment restraint.Pay less compensation for the labour and at the same time demand huge penalty when the labour breaksthe contract.Thus the point at this issue is that how we can handle the penalty.On this matter,we should remedy the shortcoming in legislation,makeit clearly that the post-employment restraint agreement is invalid when there is no compensation clause,as to arranging the compensation numberalready,it should put forward the mandatory demands of compensation number and clarify the conditions that the penalty can be revised.