Companies Bruised Over the 'Right to Unionize'... "Improvement Needed in Replacement Work and Workplace Occupation Regulations"

Proposes 7 Labor-Management Improvement Tasks to Government
Allows 'Alternative Work' for Dispute Response... Prohibits Occupation Like US, UK, Germany

Officials from the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), the National People's Action, and the Joint Struggle Against Irregular Employment, along with other labor and civil society organizations, held a press conference on the 14th in front of the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, to launch the "Campaign Headquarters for the Amendment of Articles 2 and 3 of the Labor Union Act Prohibiting Primary Contractor Liability and Compensation Claims." Photo by Kim Hyun-min kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporter Moon Chae-seok] The business community has drawn attention by conveying to the government the opinion that labor disputes such as strikes should be resolved through new hires, and if necessary, laws should be enacted to prevent labor unions from occupying workplaces, as is the case in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany. They are asking for a complete overhaul of the legal system, which is so tilted toward labor that it is called a "tilted playing field," to reduce management difficulties.

On the 19th, the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) announced that it sent a proposal to the Ministry of Employment and Labor urging a revolutionary improvement of seven tasks, including workplace occupation and regulations on non-employee workers' access to workplaces. The seven tasks are ▲allowing replacement labor during labor disputes ▲prohibiting workplace occupation ▲improving the unfair labor practice system ▲complying with related rules when non-employee workers enter workplaces ▲expanding the effectiveness of collective agreement validity periods ▲improving voting procedures for labor disputes ▲strengthening the effectiveness of administrative orders to correct illegal collective agreements.

"Helpless against labor disputes... We must be given a chance to prepare countermeasures"

The FKI pointed out that from the perspective of companies, the reality that it is difficult to replace work disrupted by strikes must be changed first. It is problematic that the law prohibits making up for strike damages through replacement labor such as new hires, subcontracting, and dispatching. This leads not only to production disruptions, sales declines, and export delays but also to penalties for contract breaches and even the closure of partner companies.

Advanced countries take the opposite approach. The United States, Japan, and Germany open the way to prevent strike losses through replacement labor. The U.S. allows all forms of replacement labor, including new hires and subcontracting. Germany and the U.K. allow replacement labor except for dispatched workers. France permits replacement labor except for dispatched and fixed-term workers.

The FKI stated, "Korea lacks the employer's right to defend against labor disputes, so companies are helplessly subjected to excessive demands and indiscriminate struggles by unions," and argued, "It is necessary to allow replacement labor in line with global standards."

"U.S. and U.K. dismiss workers who occupy workplaces: advanced countries as 'negative examples'"

The FKI's expression of "helplessness" leads to workplace occupation. According to the FKI, illegal acts such as assault, facility destruction, and business obstruction occur in areas where workplace occupation is permitted due to the Labor Union Act. They cited the example of the occupation of Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering's dock in June.

In the U.S., U.K., and Germany, workplace occupation is deemed illegal and prohibited. Strikes are only allowed outside the workplace. In the U.S. and U.K., those who refuse to comply can be dismissed.

Japan also allows partial occupation of workplaces like Korea but has far fewer lost workdays due to strikes. According to the FKI, the average annual lost workdays due to strikes from 2010 to 2020 were 38.1 days in Korea, compared to only 0.2 days in Japan.

The FKI emphasized, "Workplace occupation not only infringes on the employer's property rights but also interferes with the work of employees who do not participate in the strike," and urged, "Korea should also completely ban the occupation of workplace facilities like advanced countries."

"Abolish criminal penalties for unfair labor practices caused by unions' frequent lawsuits"

The FKI also argued that the unreasonable regulations related to unfair labor practices, which provide unions with an excuse to "file lawsuits first," should be revised. According to the FKI, Korea's unfair labor practice system unilaterally regulates only employers and imposes criminal penalties for violations. This leads unions to frequently file lawsuits and complaints. According to the 'Employment Labor White Paper' published by the Ministry of Employment and Labor last year, only 15.5% of employers reported for unfair labor practices to local employment and labor offices in 2020 were actually prosecuted. The remaining 84.5% were mere noise.

Conversely, there are no specific regulations for unfair labor practices by unions. There is no legal basis to sanction acts such as unjustified refusal to negotiate, coercion to join specific unions, or demands for operational support by unions. In the U.S., both unions and employers are equally regulated, and there are no criminal penalties. Japan regulates only employers like Korea but has no criminal penalty provisions. Germany and the U.K. do not have an unfair labor practice system at all.

The FKI said, "To maintain a balance in labor-management bargaining power and establish a fair labor-management order, it is necessary to delete employer criminal penalty provisions like in the U.S. and Japan and introduce an unfair labor practice system for unions."

"Unify the effect of collective agreements and the duration of bargaining representative union status to '3 years'"

The FKI also advocated ▲the right to refuse access to workplaces by non-employee workers such as dismissed workers or at least the obligation to comply with minimal regulations ▲and maintaining the same '3-year' period for the effect of collective agreements and the status of bargaining representative unions.

In particular, the mismatch between the periods of collective agreements and bargaining unions is pointed out as a problem. Currently, the effect of collective agreements lasts for three years, while the status of bargaining representative unions lasts only two years. If an employer painstakingly negotiates wages and collective agreements (wage and collective bargaining agreements) with a bargaining union but the bargaining union changes before the agreement expires, the loss increases accordingly. The agreement is unlikely to be properly observed. The FKI criticized this as nullifying the purpose of the Labor Union Act, which extended the validity period to three years to reduce labor-management conflicts and negotiation costs caused by wage and collective bargaining agreements.

The FKI argued, "To effectively expand the validity period of collective agreements and establish a stable labor-management relationship, the validity period of collective agreements and the duration of bargaining representative union status should be unified to three years."

Choo Kwang-ho, head of the Economic Headquarters, said, "Korea sufficiently guarantees the right of unions to engage in labor disputes, but unlike major advanced countries, the system to guarantee employers' right to defend is insufficient," and emphasized, "To minimize industrial damage caused by labor-management conflicts and correct the 'tilted playing field' for unions, the Labor Union Act must be revised to meet global standards."

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