[Work Revolution] 6 out of 10 Companies Say "Changes to the 52-Hour Workweek Needed if Telecommuting is Introduced"

Companies Say "Legal and Institutional Changes Must Accompany to Change the Work Framework"
Untact Industry Will Revert to the Past Without Institutional Changes Despite Technological Advances

[Asia Economy Reporter Suyeon Woo] The HR manager of Company A, which employs over 500 staff members, recently found themselves troubled by the management of the suddenly implemented work-from-home system due to the spread of the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19). They had to sort out sensitive issues such as how to manage employees' attendance and break times, overtime pay, performance evaluations, the scope of industrial accident coverage, and information leaks. Moreover, changing the employment rules requires consultation with the labor union, which is no easy process. The manager said, "We started work-from-home because of COVID-19, but for long-term adoption, there are several institutional aspects that need revision. It will take considerable time just to draft a proposal for discussion with the union."

According to the survey results of the "Corporate Work Styles and Perceptions in Response to COVID-19," conducted by Asia Economy on 150 domestic companies on the 15th, 6 out of 10 companies (61.3%) answered that changes are needed to the current 52-hour workweek system when introducing work-from-home. Although the government introduced the 52-hour workweek to improve flexible working environments, the field agrees that detailed provisions need to be supplemented.

Under current law, systems that provide flexibility in working hours, such as the discretionary and flexible work systems, are stipulated in the Labor Standards Act, but there is no legal basis or explicit regulation for work-from-home systems that allow flexibility in the 'location' of work. Instead, companies are implementing work-from-home by broadly applying the 'deemed working hours outside the workplace' system, which is a type of discretionary work system.

Although the Ministry of Employment and Labor's guidelines include work-from-home content, the legal basis is unclear, leaving room for disputes at any time. Also, changing employment rules requires agreement between labor and management or individual employee consent, and companies complain that meeting specific conditions and establishing performance evaluation systems is not easy. Even if collective agreements or employment rules are changed through labor-management agreements, if the changes are disadvantageous to employees, they are considered illegal.

The number of companies considering the introduction of a '4-day workweek' that grants autonomy over working hours is increasing, but it is expected to take considerable time for the system to settle. In the survey, 62 out of 150 companies (42.2%) answered that they are considering the 4-day workweek either in the short or long term. By industry, ICT companies showed the highest possibility of adoption at 45%, followed by finance (42.5%) and manufacturing (40%).

To implement a 4-day workweek, companies can utilize the 'choice work system,' where employees set their own working hours. However, the current choice work system has a short calculation period of up to one month, causing inconvenience in the field. This is because industries such as research and development (R&D) and financial investment banking (IB), which handle long-term projects of two to three months or more, find it difficult to adjust working hours on a monthly basis.

Experts emphasize that establishing laws and systems is urgent to improve flexible working environments in line with the post-COVID era. Professor Junmo Cho of the Department of Economics at Sungkyunkwan University pointed out, "If legal systems cannot keep pace with the rapid development of untact technologies and infrastructure, conflicts between technology and systems may occur soon."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.