勞資爭議處理法第54 條第1 項規定：「工會非經會員以直接、無記名投票且經全體過半數同意，不得宣告罷工及設置糾察線。」同法第55 條第3 項揭櫫：「工會及其會員所為之爭議行為，該當刑法及其他刑法之構成要件，而具有正當性者，不罰。但以強暴脅迫致他人生命、身體受侵害或有受侵害之虞者，不適用之。」由以上法律規定得知，勞資爭議行為須有「工會」為行為主體，且須符合上述法律要件，方可阻卻以集會遊行方式行使爭議權之處罰違法性。然而，團體行動權如罷工行為等爭議權之行使，依法劃設糾察 線後，糾察線裡的所有阻礙事業正常運作及與之對抗之行為，果真警方適合介入？若罷工訴求仍達不到目的時，為保障人民的言論、集會自由以及不特定第三人之「行」的權利時，能否將社會法理念融入集會遊行法制中，協調創設「言論表達區」，讓糾察線以外的抗爭能阻卻違法？切勿令勞資爭議成為違法之抗爭行為，使治安機關成為第一線打壓「公平正義」的罪人，實乃本末倒置。而大陸地區並無「罷工」之法律規定，更遑論糾察線之規範，因此，期望藉由本篇之研究，提供兩岸治安機關處理勞資爭議行為之參考。

Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes Article 54 subparagraph 1: "A labor union shall not call a strike and set up a picketing line unless the strike has been approved by no less than one half of the members in total via direct and secret balloting." The same Act Article 55 subparagraph 3 : "Justifiable industrial actions undertaken by a labor union and its members that are pursuant to the requirements under the Criminal Code and other special criminal statutes are not penalized. However, the foresaid rule is not applicable when force and threat are used and the life or body of other person is or may be harmed." From the above statues that we know Labor-Management Dispute activities must be declared by labor unions.And complying with the legal requirements. As a result,the Labor- Management Dispute activities by the assembly and procession mode can be legal justification.However, the right to dispute that such as the strike accompanying a picketing line.In the picketing line area, shall the police intervene in impeding business operations? In case the strike is still not up to the demands of purpose. Can merging the social law perspective into the law of assembly and procession, in order to protect the freedoms of speech and assembly and other pepole’s rights of way? Can coordinating and designating the “freedom of expression area” to the protestation’ legal justification outside the picketing line? Do not make Labor-Management Disputes become illegal activities. If the police become the first line to suppress the “social fairness and justice”, it is upside down. Mainland China is no legal requirement of the “strike”, let alone the rule of picketing line.Therefore,this study’s expectation is that providing the police of the Cross-Strait with references.