Lotte, Shinsegae, Shilla, and 7 Companies File for Relief
Union Demands Direct Negotiations with Duty-Free Shops
Duty-Free Shops Say "No Contractual Relationship"
The domestic duty-free shop industry and the labor unions of tenant companies are unable to narrow their differences over the issue of ‘extending business hours.’ The duty-free shops argue that since the number of domestic tourists has significantly increased after the endemic phase (periodic outbreaks of infectious diseases), the shortened business hours during the COVID-19 period should be extended again. However, the workers of the tenant companies maintain that extending business hours is impossible unless staffing is restored to pre-COVID levels and working conditions are improved.
According to the Department Store Duty-Free Shop Sales Service Labor Union on the 19th, the union submitted a petition for relief from unfair labor practices regarding the JDC Jeju Airport Duty-Free Shop to the Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission on the 18th. The petition reportedly includes demands such as a ban on unilateral extension of business hours, implementation of regular closing days, and protection of workers’ rights during customer service interactions. Earlier, on September 26, the union submitted relief petitions to the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission against six department store and duty-free shop companies excluding JDC (Lotte Department Store & Duty-Free, Shinsegae Department Store & Duty-Free, Hyundai Department Store, Shilla Duty-Free). Kim Ju-yeon, a lawyer at the Service Federation’s Legal Office, said, "We just submitted the petition today, so it’s only the first step. I expect the labor commission to make a decision within two to three months."
The conflict between the duty-free shop industry and the labor unions of tenant companies has escalated since early this year. Following the endemic phase, major duty-free shops gradually extended their business hours, prompting tenant company unions to demand improvements in working conditions such as guaranteed closing days and facility upgrades. The unions emphasize that the party with actual decision-making authority is the duty-free shop, not the tenant companies who are the direct contracting parties, and thus demand direct negotiations with the duty-free shops. However, the duty-free shops argue that since the workers are dispatched employees who have contracts with each tenant company, they have no obligation to negotiate directly with them. The unions requested direct negotiations with the duty-free shops five times from January to August this year, but these requests were rejected.
An industry insider said, "Currently, the duty-free shops are not ‘extending’ working hours but rather returning to normal operations at pre-COVID levels. While we understand the difficulties faced by sales staff, the duty-free shops are not in any contractual relationship with them, so there is little justification for direct dialogue."
The unions stress that even if the duty-free shops are not the direct contracting parties, they have sufficient reason to engage in direct negotiations as they hold actual decision-making authority. They also stated their intention to use all possible means to oppose any unilateral extension of business hours by the duty-free shop industry going forward.
A union representative said, "About 95% of workers at department stores and duty-free shops belong to tenant companies, so it makes no sense for the duty-free shops to claim no responsibility for the labor environment of sales staff. If the duty-free shops continue to refuse negotiations, we will respond using various methods."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
