[The Shadow of Multiple Unions] Labor-Labor Conflict is a Preview... The Main Story is the 'Nojo Act'

Concerns Raised Over Greater Burden When July Amendment Takes Effect

Last October, union members from the two major labor unions held a press conference in front of the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, opposing the government's anti-labor labor law amendments and urging the ratification of the International Labour Organization (ILO) core conventions. Photo by Jinhyung Kang aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Heung-soon] Companies are expressing concerns over the power struggle between the two major labor unions in South Korea?the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU) and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU)?which has surfaced in the distribution industry, delivery platform companies, and some public institutions. However, the prevailing view is that this is merely a 'preview.' The business community fears that the upcoming amendment to the "Labor Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (Labor Union Act)," set to take effect in July, will be the 'main feature' that fuels labor-management confusion in the industrial field.

Allowing Union Membership and Workplace Access for Dismissed and Unemployed Workers
Concerns Over Production Disruptions and Disputes

According to the government and business circles on the 12th, the South Korean government plans to soon deposit ratification documents for three International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions with the ILO: the Forced or Compulsory Labour Convention (No. 29), the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention (No. 98). Previously, in line with ILO core conventions Nos. 87 and 98, amendments to the Labor Union Act, the Teachers' Union Act, and the Public Officials' Union Act, which allow unemployed and dismissed workers to join unions, were passed by the National Assembly in December last year.

The biggest point of contention between the government and business circles lies in the amendment to the enforcement decree of the Labor Union Act. The core focus is on allowing dismissed and unemployed workers to join unions, thereby elevating domestic labor laws to international standards. Initially, the government’s proposal allowed unemployed and dismissed workers to join unions but stipulated that non-working union members must comply with workplace rules regarding access and use of facilities during union activities within the workplace. However, during the legislative process, the scope was narrowed only to prohibit strike actions in 'facilities related to production and other major tasks.'

As a result, economic organizations and the business community worry that cases of occupying workplace facilities during strike actions may frequently occur. An industry official said, "In service sectors with many customer contact points, direct damage is inevitable due to union strike actions occurring within the workplace," adding, "There is no proper way to prevent such problems even if they arise."

Regarding this, the Ministry of Employment and Labor explained, "Given that the characteristics of industries and processes, procedures and practices of union activities within workplaces, and internal regulations differ by company, it is not desirable to regulate all situations in detail through legislation," and added, "Just as companies set their own internal access procedures, it would be more efficient for companies to establish rules or collective agreements regarding access and union activities of non-company union members."

U.S. and Europe Explicitly Prohibit Workplace Occupation Strikes
"Economic Organizations Plan to Propose Amendments to Codify This"

Major countries such as the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and France uphold the principle that workers' right to organize and employers' property and business rights must be equally protected, and therefore, strikes involving workplace occupation are generally prohibited. In contrast, South Korea and Japan partially allow such actions or tolerate 'coexisting occupation,' which does not exclude employer access or management control. Japan also deems exclusive workplace occupation?where non-union members block access and make company operations impossible?as illegal.

Losses caused by strikes involving workplace occupation are relatively high in South Korea. According to the Korea Economic Research Institute (KERI), from 2007 to 2017, the average number of lost workdays due to labor disputes was 42.3 days in South Korea, significantly longer than in the United States (6.0 days) and Japan (0.2 days).

KERI plans to soon propose to the government that the current amendment to the enforcement decree of the Labor Union Act include provisions such as mandatory compliance with workplace access and facility use rules for non-working union members during union activities, allowing workplace access only when approved in advance by the employer or limited to union offices, and establishing grounds for eviction if union activities disrupt business operations. Additionally, KERI intends to request expanding Article 14, Paragraph 10 of the amendment, which extends the validity period of collective agreements from two to three years while maintaining the bargaining representative union’s status period at two years, to also extend the bargaining representative union’s status period to three years.

Kim Yong-chun, head of the Employment Policy Team at KERI, stated, "If there is a difference between the bargaining representative union’s status period and the validity period of collective agreements, it reduces efficiency and increases negotiation costs from the employer’s perspective," adding, "Considering that the main role of the bargaining representative union is to conclude collective agreements, linking the enforcement decree and the validity period of collective agreements aligns with the legislative intent."

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