[In-Depth Look] Reflections Arising from the Government's Amendment to the Labor Union Act

Professor Kim Hee-sung, Kangwon National University School of Law

Recently, there has been intense interest in whether the government's proposed amendments to the Trade Union Act, related to the ratification of the International Labour Organization (ILO) core conventions and the necessary revisions to labor union laws, will pass the National Assembly in their original form. It is positive that South Korea’s labor relations laws and systems are presented with an opportunity for rational reform to raise their standards by adopting international labor norms and to realize labor-management autonomy.

However, since the ILO core conventions contain general provisions requiring additional interpretation, and considering the need for further review based on South Korea’s unique circumstances regarding the effectiveness and content of recommendations from the Committee on Freedom of Association, ratification must be approached cautiously, taking various aspects into account.

In particular, it is problematic that no clear blueprint has been presented on how to respond to the side effects that may arise if the ILO core convention norms are adopted without fully considering the characteristics of our labor-management environment and ecosystem, how the future of our labor relations will change through legal amendments, and why such changes are necessary.

Furthermore, the ratification of the core conventions and the related amendments to the Trade Union Act are not merely about ratifying the content of the conventions but require concrete and specialized judgments, including understanding the labor relations and socio-economic impacts on the industrial field. However, there is a lack of research and review on this matter. As a result, one side emphasizes the necessity or legitimacy of ratification and the related amendments to the Trade Union Act only in moral or normative terms, while the other side defends the assumed negative socio-economic ripple effects of ratification and amendments in hypothetical terms. Consequently, the arguments and logic of both sides clash sharply, resulting in a deadlock with no compromise or consensus on individual issues.

Moreover, the government’s proposed amendments to the Trade Union Act contain several provisions with explosive potential that could change labor relations at the workplace level and even the organizational structure and dynamics of labor unions. These include expanding the eligibility for membership in enterprise-level labor unions to include not only workers at the workplace but also dismissed workers and the unemployed, and deleting the provision prohibiting payment of wages to union officials. In essence, the government’s amendment proposal can be summarized as strengthening the labor system by enhancing the freedom or right to organize under the banner of realizing a “labor-respecting society.” While the government aims to meet international labor standards through ratification of the ILO core conventions and amendments to labor relations laws, it is questionable that key areas of the Trade Union Act related to dispute actions such as replacement labor, lockouts, and workplace occupations are completely excluded from discussion. Regarding the amendment to the Trade Union Act, it is necessary to clearly diagnose and critically review the current unstable aspects of collective labor relations and the parts that undermine the balance of labor relations, and to seek directions for amendments within the scope where the fundamental rights of labor and management guaranteed by the Constitution can be harmonized.

So far, such goals and directions have not been visible. It is time to seriously consider whether the objective of legal amendments that could change the horizon of labor relations is solely for the ratification of the ILO core conventions. There is skepticism about whether we can predict how our labor relations will change and what our industry will look like after the Trade Union Act is passed according to the government’s amendment proposal.

Even now, the government needs to discuss not only the comparison of laws and systems for ratifying the ILO core conventions but also the socio-economic impacts of ratification. If the government strongly pushes for amendments to the Trade Union Act, it will be more persuasive to present to labor and management the direction of the amendments and the future image of labor relations that will be created as a result.