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
구강회 (두잉)
저널정보
한국법이론실무학회 법이론실무연구 법이론실무연구 제12권 제4호
발행연도
2024.11
수록면
467 - 496 (30page)
DOI
10.30833/LTPR.2024.11.12.4.467

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Currently, in resolving labor-management disputes, a third-party labor committee composed of worker representatives, scholars, legal practitioners, and representatives of companies or organizations is established to hold public debates related to the resolution of the dispute. The importance of doing this is being pointed out.
In many labor-management dispute resolution procedures, public involvement is implemented, but public discussion plays an important role in attempting to resolve disputes. However, in public debate that develops through dialogue and communication in the real world, it is extremely difficult to realize public discourse through ideal dialogue and communication as Habermas did.
In reality, there are many cases where coordinated discussions do not take place among discussants or where specific participants arbitrarily lead discussions. In addition, discussion participants with different values or interests may not reach agreement on dispute resolution, which may lead to deadlock in discussions and block decision-making related to reconciliation and mediation.
In order to find the basis for legitimacy related to decision-making on labor-management compromise within the realistic practice of open discussion, it is inevitable to answer the normative question: What is a desirable open discussion?
In the field of labor law, a number of empirical and empirical studies relevant to public discussion have been accumulated. However, in conventional research, normative theories regarding ‘the fundamental attitude of desirable discussions’ are not sufficiently discussed. However, in a situation where such normative theory does not exist, it is difficult to find standards to evaluate their agreement for realistic public discussion and to improve the current situation for better discussion.
In ensuring the legitimacy of decision-making through the implementation of public discussion, it is an important task to identify the normative requirements that the discussion process must meet. Based on this awareness of the problem, this study organizes the meaning and tasks of public discussion related to labor-management disputes based on knowledge from discussion theory, including Habermas, and establishes the basic principles and normative requirements that public discussion must meet, we consider the basic ideas of evaluating the desirability of discussion. At this time, I introduces the concept of a discussion system and examines a theoretical framework to ensure the legitimacy of decision-making to resolve disputes across various discussions. In addition, the discussion ethics that this study is based on is an attempt to change the procedure to establish the basis for the possibility of universalizing moral judgments or norms in the form of Kant’s categorical imperative by moving it from the perspective of mutual subjects to the scene of practical discussion.
This article excludes debates about the rights and wrongs of this normative approach. Rather, we argue that achieving reconciliation should be justified and actively defended from the perspective of the formation of new norms.

목차

국문초록
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 노동분쟁 발생 시 주요 절차
Ⅲ. 기업이 윤리(모럴)의 주체가 될 수 있는지 여부
Ⅳ. 결론
참고문헌
ABSTRACT

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-25-02-091213258