[Reporter’s Notebook] Time to Eradicate the Distorted ‘Written Ballot’ Practice in Union Decision-Making

A member of a redevelopment union in Gangbuk-gu, Seoul, recently received a baffling phone call. It was a solicitation to vote in advance by written ballot for a general meeting that would decide the reappointment of the union's executive committee. Although he said, "I will attend the general meeting in person," the persuasion continued. They tried to convince him by saying, "Vote by written ballot and then attend. If you go directly to the site, you will receive less attendance compensation." Feeling pressured as if being forced to vote by written ballot, he eventually marked the phone number as spam.

Outsourcing (OS) agents hired by the union's executive committee commonly coerce union members to vote by written ballot at redevelopment and reconstruction sites ahead of general meetings. The executive committee also encourages early voting by offering payments such as "100,000 won if you vote by written ballot and attend the meeting, and 50,000 won if you only vote on-site." Originally, this money was paid as transportation expenses to encourage attendance at the general meeting, but the payment structure was changed so that members receive more if they vote by written ballot without coming to the site.

It is hard to understand why written ballots are still being forced in an era when online voting is possible. If the purpose is to prevent the general meeting from being canceled due to a lack of quorum, online voting is a simpler solution. Choosing the hassle of meeting union members one by one seems deliberate, raising suspicion that written ballots are being used as a kind of trick to persuade members and secure approval votes. If approval votes are obtained in advance, it is almost as if the resolution has already been made before the general meeting is held.

According to Kim Young-ho, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, 85% of voting rights at dissolution general meetings of redevelopment and reconstruction unions in Seoul over the past three years were exercised by written ballot. In one general meeting, 80% of on-site votes were against the proposal, but the result was overturned as over 90% of written ballots were in favor. Written ballots are not simply used to increase voter turnout but are being utilized as a device to pass agendas according to the executive committee's intentions.

The government announced plans to legalize online voting, which was allowed under the regulatory sandbox in the August 8 supply plan. Although Kwon Young-se, a member of the People Power Party, proposed a bill, that alone is insufficient. The real issue to consider is why most unions do not use online voting despite its availability. As of July this year, only 12 unions have used online voting.

Now that the door to online voting is being opened wider, this is an opportunity to eliminate the practice of written ballots. It is not enough to simply say "online voting will also be possible"; this is the time to properly examine and reform the harms of written ballots. During the transitional period when online voting is being established in practice, one method is to raise barriers by expanding the types of agendas for which written ballots are not allowed. Ultimately, the direction should be to abolish the problematic written ballot system.