The Proposed Bills for the Protection of Non-Regular Workers

In October, the ruling Grand National Party proposed 9 revision bills regarding the comprehensive measures for non-regular workers. Considering the upcoming important political schedules for the parliamentary and presidential elections, debate on these bills is likely to gain momentum even though the current 18th session of the National Assembly is almost over.

These bills of revision focus on protection of non-regular workers and regulation of business while ignoring the current business conditions and labor market. Therefore, the burden on companies is likely to become even greater. All business is urged to join forces in responding to such politically motivated moves to reform the labor laws.

All primary contractors shall take joint responsibility with subcontractors for overdue wages under multi-staged subcontracts.

The authority of labor supervisors is strengthened by allowing them to monitor whether or not employers eliminate discrimination at the workplace. Also, with approval from the Labor Relations Commission, labor supervisors have the right to demand correction of any discriminatory treatment against non-regular workers. Employers who do not obey such an order will be fined up to 100 million Korean won. The application period for correcting discrimination is extended from 3 months to 6 months.

If a dispatched worker is employed regularly, employers are allowed to hire such dispatched workers for more than 2 years. However, if a worker is found to be illegally dispatched, the employer must hire him or her directly.

Employers using a dispatched workforce shall write Rules of Employment for them regarding employers’ legal obligations under the Act on the Protection, Etc., of Dispatched Workers

The law states that non-regular workers have the right to appoint a legal deputy to file an injunction from the Labor Relations Commission for correction of discrimination

Presidential Decree stipulates the justifiable reasons for not offering occupational health and safety insurance for atypical workers and, only upon approval from the Occupational Health and Safety Insurance Corporation, can employers exclude atypical workers from occupational health and safety insurance.

This revision will give legal grounds for the government to subsidize insurance premiums for SMEs, and employees eligible for subsidies are exempt from paying any due or deferred premiums.

Current law stipulates that the minimum wage for apprentices who have worked for less than 1 year may be 10% lower than the general minimum wage. The proposed revision reverses this, and primary contractors face a maximum 3 years imprisonment or a fine of 20 million Korean won if said primary contractor is the reason for subcontracted workers being paid less than the minimum wage.

If in-house subcontracted workers or dispatched workers benefit from a company’s welfare fund, the maximum limit of the company welfare fund will be increased.

If an employer plans to assign work usually conducted by regular workers to in-house or dispatched workers, the employer is required by law to consult with the Labor-Management Council.

First, differences in treatment between regular and non-regular workers should be dealt with as a private matter in a way which reflects all the unique features and conditions at each workplace and for each worker. Therefore, the proposed revision to the Act on the Protection, Etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-time Employees allowing labor supervisors to monitor workplaces for instances of discrimination does not fit reality or the original purpose of this law.

Second, according to the proposed revision to the Act on the Protection, Etc. of Dispatched Workers, if dispatched workers are found to have been employed illegally, employers are required to hire them as regular workers. This article ignores the free will existing between employer and worker in the employment relationship and legal debates are possible as some have suggested this is unconstitutional. This article fundamentally erodes such individual freedoms as the freedom of contract.

Third, the proposed revision to the Labor Relations Commission Act exaggerates extremely the scope of legal representation regarding affirmative action. If the labor union appears as legal representative, industrial relations may deteriorate overall due to the possibility of collective actions during disputes in support of the union as legal representative.

Fourth, outsourcing is a company’s strategic method of increased production. The Article requiring employers to consult on such managerial issues with the Labor-Management Council is an excessive restriction that ignores company independence.

Fifth, the proposed revision to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, which guarantees compulsory health insurance for atypical workers to the same level of general workers, violates the freedom of individual workers on whether to sign up for insurance or not, besides increasing their financial burden.

Sixth, the government’s financial support stated in the proposed revision to the Act on the Collection, Etc. of Premiums for Employment Insurance and Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance can be regarded as a positive change. However, worker exemption from due and deferred premiums is not appropriate.

Seventh, the Article of proposed revision to the Labor Standards Act stipulates that all primary contractors shall take joint responsibility (with subcontractors) for overdue wages is against the reality of the labor market considering the foreseeable existence of multi-staged contracts and complicated connections.