Court Rules Promotion System Recognizing Military Service Constitutes Gender Discrimination

A female employee who filed a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission of Korea, arguing that a personnel system reflecting military service in promotions for new hires constituted gender-based discrimination, had her complaint dismissed but later won a lawsuit.

Seoul Seocho District Seoul Family Court and Seoul Administrative Court. Yonhap News Agency

원본보기 아이콘

According to the legal community on April 19, the 8th Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Yang Soonjoo) ruled in favor of the plaintiff on February 11 in a lawsuit filed by Ms. A against the National Human Rights Commission of Korea, seeking to overturn the dismissal of her complaint.

Ms. A was hired through an open recruitment process at a non-profit corporation and subsequently became a full-time employee. According to the corporation's personnel management and salary regulations, university graduates and those with equivalent qualifications are initially placed at level 6, step 10. In contrast, discharged veterans with two years of military service are given two additional steps and hired at level 5, step 12.

Ms. A filed a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission of Korea in October 2024, claiming, "Female workers are disadvantaged in terms of wages and promotions even if they provide the same work for the same period as male workers, which constitutes discrimination based on gender."

However, in February last year, the Commission dismissed her complaint, stating, "Setting different initial salary steps for new employees based on whether they are discharged veterans cannot be considered discriminatory treatment that disadvantages women without reasonable cause." Ms. A contested this decision by filing a lawsuit.

The court determined that this personnel system constitutes gender-based discrimination. Employees starting at level 6, step 10, must work two years before they are eligible for promotion to level 5. As a result, women without military service inevitably need two more years than discharged male veterans, who joined at the same time and performed the same work, to be promoted to level 4. Furthermore, as experience evaluation-used for compiling promotion candidate lists-is based on duration in each position, veterans who are initially appointed at level 5 are inevitably at an advantage, the court explained.

The court stated, "The system is designed so that military service directly affects the promotion period," and pointed out that, "The Act on Support for Discharged Military Personnel only stipulates that military service may be included in work experience when determining salary steps or wages, but it does not stipulate that it can be reflected in promotions."

Additionally, the court cited as grounds for its decision: ▲the Act on Gender Equality in Employment explicitly prohibits gender discrimination in promotions, and ▲there is no need to recognize military service as promotion experience since the corporation's work has no direct relation to military service.

The court further ruled, "These personnel regulations treat men and women differently based on gender without reasonable cause," and thus found the Human Rights Commission's dismissal of the complaint unlawful.

However, the court did not find the wage difference to be unlawful. During the trial, Ms. A argued that the basic salary for discharged veterans hired at level 5, step 12, and for general university graduates hired at level 6, step 10, differs by 200,000 won per month, resulting in an annual wage gap of about 14 million won. The court responded that this is intended to compensate for the economic loss incurred by being conscripted or called up for military service involuntarily, and therefore does not violate the principle of equality.

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.