지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Under the art. 81 of Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, payment of wages to full time union officials by employers for the duration of their tenure shall be prohibited. And under the art. 24 paragraph 2 of the same Act, the full time union officials shall not receive any remuneration from their employers. The purpose of these provisions is to maintain and reinforce independence of trade unions from employers. However, these clauses are not in force at present and delayed for more than 12 years, too. They can't take effect until January 1, 2010. The reason of long-delay of enforcement is that the representative model of Korean trade unions is 'company union' and that many of them are not able to obey these rules immediately, as the members are not sufficient to give wages to their union officials.
By the way, now-a-days, most of the trade unions, including FKTU(federation of Korean trade unions), criticize these provisions of the Act, on the ground that the State won't recognize collective autonomy of social partners regarding treatment of union officials. Furthermore, the trade unions are eager for revision of the rules before going into effect, as ILO Committee on Freedom of Association has recommended to Korean governmen revision 'of them.
According to Korean Supreme Court, the individual labor relations of full time officials are as follows: they are exempt from duties of performing their own work under the collective agreements or the consents by employers, on condition that they perform duties for a trade union. And judges has decided in many cases that union officials' activities for their trade union were considered as performance for their company, and that they should be compensated by insurance benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, when they had been injured while doing their union activities. Besides, the judges interpreted that union officials should obey to the rules of employment and that, if not, they could be punished righteously by disciplinary rights of employers.
In this study, I'd like to emphasize that the legislators must refer to the cases, where judges have regarded union officials' activities for a trade union in many parts as activities for their company. And I think the State should not prohibit but try to permit the collective agreements, where the social partners consent that the union officials should be given equal treatment in wages to other employees by the employers, when they perform ordinarily activities for the trade union in the company.
By the way, now-a-days, most of the trade unions, including FKTU(federation of Korean trade unions), criticize these provisions of the Act, on the ground that the State won't recognize collective autonomy of social partners regarding treatment of union officials. Furthermore, the trade unions are eager for revision of the rules before going into effect, as ILO Committee on Freedom of Association has recommended to Korean governmen revision 'of them.
According to Korean Supreme Court, the individual labor relations of full time officials are as follows: they are exempt from duties of performing their own work under the collective agreements or the consents by employers, on condition that they perform duties for a trade union. And judges has decided in many cases that union officials' activities for their trade union were considered as performance for their company, and that they should be compensated by insurance benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, when they had been injured while doing their union activities. Besides, the judges interpreted that union officials should obey to the rules of employment and that, if not, they could be punished righteously by disciplinary rights of employers.
In this study, I'd like to emphasize that the legislators must refer to the cases, where judges have regarded union officials' activities for a trade union in many parts as activities for their company. And I think the State should not prohibit but try to permit the collective agreements, where the social partners consent that the union officials should be given equal treatment in wages to other employees by the employers, when they perform ordinarily activities for the trade union in the company.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
Ⅱ. 노조전임자의 급여는 임금이 아닌가?
Ⅲ. 노조전임자 급여지급금지 규정에 관한 입법론적 고찰
Ⅳ. 2010년 1월 1일 시행예정인 노조법 제81조 제4호 및 제24조 제2항의 개선책
Ⅴ. 맺음말
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
노조 전임자 근로시간면제제도의 쟁점과 과제
노동법연구
2010 .03
-
노조활동을 곤란하게 할 목적으로 한 행위의 부당노동행위해당성 : 대판 2011. 7. 28. 2009두9574를 중심으로
노동법논총
2012 .12
-
노조전임자와 급여
노동법논총
2007 .06
-
노조의 존립ㆍ자주성의 보호와 그 모순
노동법학
2006 .06
-
노동조합 정의규정과 설립심사제도 : 법상 노조 아님 통보를 중심으로
노동법학
2014 .09
-
단결선택권과 단결하지 아니할 자유를 고려한 단결강제 제도의 모색
노동법학
2020 .03
-
복수노조제도의 실제적 운영과 법적 과제 : 김해ㆍ양산지역 복수노조사업장을 중심으로
노동법논총
2014 .08
-
일본의 노조전임자 제도
노동법논총
2013 .08
-
근로시간면제제도의 법적 쟁점
노동법포럼
2010 .10
-
복수노동조합과 단결강제
노동법논총
2011 .12
-
인도 노동조합법 : 노동조합 설립 및 승인과 관련된 문제점을 중심으로
노동법논총
2009 .12
-
勞組專任者의 地位 및 處遇
법학논총
2007 .02
-
노조전임자 급여지급에 관한 노동법적 고찰
노동법학
2008 .06
-
조직강제를 위한 유니언숍 협정의 법리에 대한 연구
일감법학
2011 .01
-
노조 활동 참가의 영향요인에 관한 연구
아세아연구
2007 .09
-
노동조합의 분열에 따른 재산귀속여부
한양법학
2011 .08
-
ILO ‘결사의 자유’ 핵심협약 관련 노조법상의 쟁점 해결 방안 : 단결권에 관한 사항을 중심으로
노동법학
2018 .12
-
일본의 복수노조에 있어서 부당노동행위
동북아법연구
2013 .01
-
서울 시내 특급 호텔 노동조합 활동에 대한 직원인식 연구 : 조합원과 비조합원의 인식차이 비교 분석을 통하여
관광레저연구
2009 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-336-018913231