EBS Fires Freelance Announcer After 9 Years... Court Rules "Unfair Dismissal"

1st and 2nd Instance Courts: "Employer's Unilateral Decision... Workers Are Right"

The appellate court ruled that the action taken by the Korea Educational Broadcasting System (EBS) to notify a freelance announcer, who had appeared on broadcasts for nine years, of the termination of their contract constitutes unfair dismissal.

According to Yonhap News on the 12th, the Seoul High Court Administrative Division 7 (Presiding Judges Gu Hoe-geun, Bae Sang-won, and Choi Da-eun) ruled against EBS in its lawsuit seeking to cancel the unfair dismissal relief retrial decision made by the Central Labor Relations Commission, just as in the first trial.

EBS [Photo by Yonhap News TV]

Announcer A worked as the host of EBS Evening News, which airs Monday through Friday, starting from April 2012. A, who worked without a separate employment contract, only signed the first contract in August 2020, but EBS notified A in August 2021 that the contract period had expired and the contract would be terminated.

In response, A filed a relief application with the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission, claiming that "EBS's contract termination constitutes unfair dismissal as it failed to comply with the obligation of written notification," and the commission ruled in A's favor. After the Central Labor Relations Commission dismissed EBS's retrial application, EBS filed this lawsuit.

In the lawsuit, EBS argued, "We did not exercise any particular direction or supervision over A's work performance," and "Our involvement in A's makeup and other aspects was the minimum necessary measure to align with the public nature of a public broadcaster," implying that A was not an employee of EBS.

They also contended, "(The company) did not designate A's workplace or working hours, nor did it separately manage clock-in and clock-out times, and only provided limited access to shared seats and intranet accounts, unlike regular employees, for the convenience of work," further arguing, "Even if A is considered an employee, the termination of the appearance contract is justified as the contract expiration was set for 2021."

However, the first trial ruled in favor of A. The court stated, "It is reasonable to consider that from April 2014, two years after A joined EBS, A was regarded as an indefinite-term contract worker under the Fixed-term and Part-time Employees Act," and "EBS's termination of the appearance contract constitutes unfair dismissal." The court found that A was an employee under the Labor Standards Act because A provided labor to EBS under a subordinate relationship for wages. The court also noted that EBS unilaterally decided the news broadcast schedule and gave specific instructions related to the work.

The appellate court also reached the same conclusion. The appellate judges stated, "The reasons claimed by the plaintiff are not significantly different from those in the first trial, and even after reviewing the additional evidence submitted, the first trial's rejection of the plaintiff's claims is justified," and "A provided labor to EBS under a subordinate relationship for wages, thus qualifying as an employee under the Labor Standards Act."