Hyundai Steel Facing Central Labor Relations Commission Arbitration: "Public Interest Committee's Tilted Playing Field" (Comprehensive)

Controversy Over Unfairness After Rejection of Pro-Labor Public Interest Commissioner Avoidance Request
Industry Concerns Ahead of April 24 Rehearing on Unfair Labor Practices Between Primary and Subcontractors

Members of the Korean Metal Workers' Union (Metal Union), an industrial union under the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), hold a relay press conference condemning the Supreme Court's delayed ruling that grants impunity to illegal dispatch offenders in front of the Supreme Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, in December 2020. Photo by Hyunmin Kim kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporter Moon Chaeseok] The recent rejection by the Central Labor Relations Commission of Hyundai Steel's request to disqualify a public interest commissioner has sparked controversy over unfairness in the industry. There are concerns that placing a public interest commissioner, who has externally supported the bargaining activities of indirectly employed subcontract workers against the primary contractor, as one of the commission members could lead to an unfair decision.

According to the industry on the 22nd, a rehearing related to unfair labor practices filed by Hyundai Steel and the Hyundai Steel Irregular Workers' Branch of the Korean Metal Workers' Union, a sectoral union under the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, is scheduled for the 24th. This rehearing by the Central Labor Relations Commission follows the dismissal by the Chungnam Regional Labor Relations Commission on November 11 last year, which ruled that "Hyundai Steel is not a party to the bargaining."

The issue lies in the fact that despite controversy over one of the five commissioners in the rehearing process being biased toward labor, the Central Labor Relations Commission dismissed Hyundai Steel's disqualification request.

Hyundai Steel filed the disqualification request for the commissioner on the 25th of last month, citing violations of Article 1 of the Labor Relations Commission Act, which requires fair performance of adjudication duties, and Article 21 of the same law, which mandates disqualification when a commissioner is unlikely to conduct fair deliberation and resolution. However, the Central Labor Relations Commission decided to reject the request on the 4th. An industry insider criticized, "The Central Labor Relations Commission dismissed the disqualification request despite clear reasons for some public interest commissioners in this rehearing case, thereby inviting controversy over unfairness from the very formation stage of the adjudication committee."

According to the industry, the commissioner in question has publicly expressed opinions guaranteeing the right of indirectly employed workers to collective bargaining with the primary contractor and that the respondent (the primary contractor) must obligatorily respond to collective bargaining. He also argued for "guaranteeing the collective bargaining rights of indirectly employed workers" as a panelist at a discussion hosted by the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, the upper organization of the Metal Workers' Union.

Since this concerns the issue of the primary contractor's status as the collective bargaining employer, the industry is closely watching the rehearing outcome. If, as the labor side claims, the subcontract (Hyundai Steel Irregular Workers' Branch), which has no explicit or implicit employment relationship with the primary contractor (Hyundai Steel), is designated as the collective bargaining counterpart, the primary contractor's bargaining burden could increase.

An industry official pointed out, "The Central Labor Relations Commission should have accepted the disqualification request for the public interest commissioner who prejudged from before the adjudication meeting that 'Hyundai Steel is the collective bargaining party of the Hyundai Steel Irregular Workers' Branch.'"

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