在工伤保险补偿与民事侵权赔偿上选择哪一种竞合模式，由于现行法律无明确说法，已成为久未破解的突出难点之一。从实践看，实行兼得即“双赔”模式与实行“就高补差”的单赔即补充模式。前者缺失公平，有违工伤保险制度设立初衷和世界各国的普遍做法；后者彰显公平，又能使受伤职工获得充分赔偿和补偿。摒弃双赔，因第三人造成的工伤事故，统一实行“就高补差”的单赔补充模式；非第三人原因工伤事故，采取“替代模式”，应成为我国工伤保险制度的必然选择。%Due to the reason of unclear description in current industrial injury law, which model should be selected for compensation, i.e., industrial injury insurance compensation or tort compensation, has become one of the tough problems lasting for long period of time. In practice, the model of “double indemnity" or "high compensation to make-up difference" is taken. But, the former lacks of fairness, and is contrary to its original intention to establish the industrial injury insurance system and the common practice in countries around the world; the latter shows fairness and allows the injured workers to obtain full compensation. We should abandon the model of “double indemnity”, and uniformly take the single compensation model of " high compensation to make-up difference" for the injuries caused by a third person. For the injuries caused by non-third person, "alternative compensation model" should be become a necessary choice in our industrial injury insurance system.
展开▼
