메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
오효진
저널정보
노동법이론실무학회 노동법포럼 노동법포럼 제43호
발행연도
2024.11
수록면
391 - 429 (39page)
DOI
10.46329/LLF.2024.11.43.391

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Article 40 of the Labor Standards Act prohibits anyone from creating or using a list for the purpose of preventing a worker from getting a job. Recently, companies operating nationwide distribution centers, such as MarketCully and Coupang, have been caught in trouble for creating blacklists to exclude day laborers from being rehired. The employers argued that the blacklisting was a legitimate exercise of their personnel rights and freedom of recruitment in response to the misconduct of the day laborers. In the MarketCurry case, the prosecutor supported the employer's argument, interpreting Article 40 of the Labor Standards Act as applying only to cases in which a worker's employment at another company was prevented.
This article critiques in detail the basis for the prosecution's decision not to prosecute. After reviewing the legislative history of the prohibition against employment interference and the blacklisting laws of other countries, the article confirms that the provisions of Article 40 of the Labor Standards Act are intended to ensure that workers' right to earn a living by freely seeking employment is not interfered with. There is no reason why a worker's claim for reemployment at a blacklisted company should be treated any differently than a worker's claim for employment at another company. Therefore, if the employer created the list to exclude the worker from being rehired for arbitrary and unconstitutional reasons, it is a violation of Article 40 of the Labor Standards Act because it was
intended to interfere with the worker's employment activities.
In order for the exclusion from rehiring to be justified as a de facto disciplinary measure against a day laborer for misconduct, as alleged by the employer, there must be a justifiable reason under Article 23(1) of the Labor Standards Act, and the exclusion from rehiring must be substantial in light of the level of misconduct and equitable in comparison to other workers. In addition, the employer's freedom to hire is limited by legal provisions prohibiting discrimination in employment, so the reason for the rehire exclusion must not be related to a prohibited discriminatory reason. If the employer can prove that it has in fact created a list for legitimate exclusion from rehiring, the behavior can only be evaluated as not violating social norms and therefore not illegal.

목차

Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 근로기준법 제40조에 대한 검찰의 제한적 해석
Ⅲ. 근로기준법 제40조의 입법 연혁과 외국의 입법례
Ⅳ. 정당한 인사권 행사로서의 명부 작성 행위와 근로기준법 제40조의 관계
Ⅴ. 맺으며
참고문헌
Abstract

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-25-02-091184770