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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 노동법이론실무학회 노동법포럼 노동법포럼 제39호
- 발행연도
- 2023.7
- 수록면
- 159 - 197 (39page)
- DOI
- 10.46329/LLF.2023.07.39.159
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Recently, the government announced a bill to partially amend the Labor Standards Act (hereinafter referred to as a "Legislative Draft"). Explanatory materials were also provided for the public"s understanding. The government"s legislative proposal, which was announced as an extension of the labor reform, was met with fierce opposition from the labor community including the two major confederations of labor unions and young people, and decided to be supplemented later without being transferred to the National Assembly. Therefore, it was considered necessary to examine the feasibility of the government"s legislative proposal. At this time, the rules centered on extended working hours were examined in comparison with French system.
Since the announcement of the government"s legislative proposal, there has been a conflict between the government"s claim that the legal working hours system needs to be reformed and another claim that the government"s legislative proposal is wrong its direction and contents. Working hours, including extended working hours, are to be used under the direction and supervision of the employer. Waiting time is also regarded as working hours if it was done under the direction and supervision of the employer. Therefore, worker"s concern is whether the employer complies with the statutory working hours stipulated by the Labor Standards Act, whether the statutory working hours are appropriate in the current labor reality, what is the maximum working hours that the employer can legally dictate under the Labor Standards Act, and whether the worker has discretion in using working hours. What is controversial this time is the maximum working hours that employers can demand from workers.
Here, the feasibility of the government"s legislative proposal was examined through a review of several points. In other words, it is necessary to examine the types of industries considered for the reform of the legal working time system, the question of the practical balance between the concentration of work and the corresponding concentration of leave which has been the focus of controversy, the consideration of the right to health, the existence of substantial social dialogue among labor unions, employers and the government that proposed the amendments in accordance with conventional labor-related social agreements or legislations.
Since the announcement of the government"s legislative proposal, there has been a conflict between the government"s claim that the legal working hours system needs to be reformed and another claim that the government"s legislative proposal is wrong its direction and contents. Working hours, including extended working hours, are to be used under the direction and supervision of the employer. Waiting time is also regarded as working hours if it was done under the direction and supervision of the employer. Therefore, worker"s concern is whether the employer complies with the statutory working hours stipulated by the Labor Standards Act, whether the statutory working hours are appropriate in the current labor reality, what is the maximum working hours that the employer can legally dictate under the Labor Standards Act, and whether the worker has discretion in using working hours. What is controversial this time is the maximum working hours that employers can demand from workers.
Here, the feasibility of the government"s legislative proposal was examined through a review of several points. In other words, it is necessary to examine the types of industries considered for the reform of the legal working time system, the question of the practical balance between the concentration of work and the corresponding concentration of leave which has been the focus of controversy, the consideration of the right to health, the existence of substantial social dialogue among labor unions, employers and the government that proposed the amendments in accordance with conventional labor-related social agreements or legislations.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 근로시간제에 관한 정부 입법예고안의 내용 : 연장근로시간 기준단위 변경을 중심으로
Ⅲ. 입법예고안에서 더 논의되어야 할 내용 : 프랑스 근로시간법제29)와의 비교를 중심으로
Ⅳ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
근로기준법상 근로시간 개념에 대한 정의 및 유연성 재고
노동법포럼
2022 .11
-
일본 변형근로시간제도에 관한 연구
산업관계연구
2019 .06
-
근로시간 단축의 제도적 논의와 쟁점
노동법학
2020 .03
-
생활시간 개념의 도입 필요성과 노동법적 과제
노동법논총
2023 .04
-
근로시간 적용제외에 관한 중국의 입법 논의 동향 - 한국 적용제외 규정과의 비교를 겸하여 -
중국법연구
2015 .01
-
근로시간 단축법 개정의 경과와 쟁점
노동법포럼
2018 .07
-
근로시간 제도의 유연화를 위한 과제
원광법학
2024 .03
-
근로시간의 판단 기준
노동법학
2022 .03
-
초연결사회의 시간주권 보장
노동법포럼
2024 .07
-
유연근로시간제 개선에 대한 연구
벤처혁신연구
2021 .09
-
일본 근로시간법제의 변천과 정책적 시사점
외법논집
2021 .08
-
노동법 상 근로시간 개념의 다원성에 관한 시론
노동법논총
2018 .12
-
통상임금의 시간급 환산을 위한 기준시간수
노동법학
2023 .03
-
근로시간 단축이 삶의 질에 미치는 영향 분석
질서경제저널
2022 .03
-
멀티잡 종사자의 노동법적 규제
노동법연구
2019 .09
-
IT · 콘텐츠 기업의 근로시간 활용에 관한 연구
동아법학
2024 .11
-
새 정부의 노동정책과 법제도의 개선 과제
노동법학
2022 .06
-
선택적 근로시간제의 적법한 도입과 활용에 관한 연구
사회법연구
2020 .01
-
최근 경제사회노동위원회의 탄력적 근로시간제 합의안에 대한 논의- 현행 근로기준법상 탄력적 근로시간제에 대한 내용을 포함하여 -
홍익법학
2019 .01
-
일본의 일하는 방식의 개혁과 근로시간법개혁
법학연구
2018 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0102-2023-360-001910097