KCCI "Subcontracted Worksite Accidents Persist... Unreasonable Systems Need Reform"

Report on Issues and Improvement Plans for Industrial Safety Regulations in Subcontracting

Concerns have been raised that industrial safety regulations related to subcontracting work at the frontline are ineffective. Although laws have been changed or introduced to increase the primary contractor's responsibility for safety management, fatal accidents involving subcontracted workers have hardly improved, indicating the need for a comprehensive overhaul of the system.

The Korea Employers Federation (KEF) made this claim in its report titled "Problems and Improvement Measures of Industrial Safety Regulation Methods in Subcontracting," released on the 21st. According to government data, the proportion of subcontracted worker fatalities has remained at around 40% of the total since 2016. The share of subcontracted worker deaths in workplaces subject to the Serious Accident Punishment Act reaches 65%. Despite the enforcement of the Industrial Safety and Health Act in 2020, which strengthened the primary contractor's safety management responsibilities, and the enactment of the Serious Accident Punishment Act, these measures have not functioned properly in the field.

A construction site of an apartment in Gyeonggi-do./Photo by Hyunmin Kim kimhyun81@

KEF pointed out that under the current Industrial Safety and Health Act, the definition of subcontracting includes tasks with no or low risk of industrial accidents within the primary contractor's management scope, which is problematic. To correct this, they suggested revising the definition of subcontracting from "any contract entrusting work to others" to "a contract entrusting a part of the business that is essential and inseparable to achieving the subcontractor's business objectives to others." They also argued that specific legal criteria should be established to clearly distinguish between the subcontractor and the client to clarify the responsible party for on-site safety management.

KEF also criticized the requirement for safety and health measures at all locations where subcontracted workers operate, which leads to primary contractor specialists being deployed to low-risk sites. They recommended designating specific locations to manage safety at subcontracted workplaces more efficiently. Additionally, they pointed out that the scope of control and management is not defined in subordinate enforcement ordinances, which is another issue.

KEF claimed that regulations banning subcontracting altogether or requiring government pre-approval for subcontracting involving certain hazardous chemicals are overlapping regulations whose effectiveness in preventing industrial accidents has not been verified. Furthermore, they emphasized that the current Industrial Safety and Health Act is unreasonable in requiring the primary contractor to comply with safety measures that should be the responsibility of the subcontractor, without considering the roles between primary and subcontractors. They argued that regardless of primary or subcontractor status, the owner of the relevant facility or equipment should be responsible for implementing safety and health measures. KEF also suggested clarifying legal responsibilities by introducing intermediate subcontractors while revising current subcontracting regulations.

Lim Woo-taek, head of KEF's Safety and Health Division, explained, "Unlike advanced countries, Korea's industrial safety regulations for subcontracting broadly define the primary contractor's management scope and hold them responsible for safety and health measures that subcontractors must comply with, but no clear effects have been observed. The implementation of the Serious Accident Punishment Act, which defines the scope of the primary contractor's responsibility differently, has caused increased confusion."