KCI등재
복수노동조합하의 단체교섭거부와 부당노동행위
저자
발행기관
학술지명
권호사항
발행연도
2007
작성언어
Korean
주제어
등재정보
KCI등재
자료형태
학술저널
수록면
33-65(33쪽)
제공처
I tried to analyze schemes of the parties, employee and employer or its association each other, to a collective bargaining in this article. I especially focused on the side of employees' association.
The Section 33 of the Korea Constitution secures that the employees have right to organize, to a collective bargaining, and to concerted activities for promoting their labor conditions. At the same time, the Constitution provides also a clause of a freedom of association in the Section 21. The Section 30 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act(TULRAA) requires that a trade union and an employer or employees' association shall bargain, in good faith and sincerity, with each other and make a collective agreement. The Section 29 of the TULRAA provides that the representative of a union has right to bargain and to make collective agreements for the union and its members.
An union and an employer or its association are respectively able to entrust their authority to bargain or to make a collective agreement to a third party. The Section 81 of the TULRAA prohibits, furthermore, some kinds of conduct by an employer as unfair labor practices and punishes those practices with a criminal penality. But it must be noted that there is no provision of a employee's unfair labor practice in the TULRAA. All of these provisions are very similar to provisions of the Constitution and the Labor Union Act in Japan.
Under these statutory circumstances, I chose a case of Tokyo District Labor Relations Commission v. Asahi Diamond Co. (1985) in Japan. Many important problems of Labor Law were involved in the case, i.e. a collective bargaining or the parties to the bargaining under plural unions within a company, a collective agreement clause that a employer should only bargain with one union, a clause that prohibits entrusting authority concerning his collective bargaining or concluding a collective agreement to a third party, and an employer's unfair labor practice etc.
An employer, in this case, refused to bargain with a group of representatives selected from two unions within a company. The employer refused to bargain on the grounds that the group did not satisfy general requirements to be a party to bargain. That is to say, the group did not have an united opinion and the authority to control members of two unions however.
The Supreme Court of Japan, finally, upheld Tokyo District Court and the Tokyo Court of Appeals finding that an employer's refusal to bargain did not violate the Section 7 of employer's unfair labor practices of the Trade Union Act(TUA) in Japan. According to my opinion, the union should have the initiative to petition a collective bargaining with employer or its association under statutory circumstances in Korea and in Japan. In determining whether an employer violates the Section 7 of the TUA in Japan or the Section 81 of the TULRAA in Korea, it is needed to take into account of an unfair labor practice system that prohibits only some kinds of conduct by employer(especially with a criminal penality in Korea). Employees have full rights, though these rights will be conducted through their union, to choose any kinds of representative by their own choosing for a collective bargaining, and to petition the bargaining with their employer, but the employer or its association has no leverage to refuse the petition by the union. It should be respected so much, in analyzing this case, that the right to a collective bargaining does not include entering into a collective agreement also. It will be within a full freedom of employer to conclude the agreement or not.
With respect to this idea, I tried to analyze the Court's opinions in Asahi Diamond. I concluded that the employer violated the Section 7 of the TUA in Japan because of his refusal to a collective bargaining.
In addition, there are generally some questions of violation with the Section 7 of the TUA in Japan or the Section 81 of the TULRAA when the employer offers any particular conditions before or on the table of the collective bargaining with union or his representative. For example, the employer's practices, that he adheres to bargain with only company union or he tries to include a clause of increasing productivity of labor in the collective agreement, are problematic in this sense.
분석정보
서지정보 내보내기(Export)
닫기소장기관 정보
닫기권호소장정보
닫기오류접수
닫기오류 접수 확인
닫기음성서비스 신청
닫기음성서비스 신청 확인
닫기이용약관
닫기학술연구정보서비스 이용약관 (2017년 1월 1일 ~ 현재 적용)
학술연구정보서비스(이하 RISS)는 정보주체의 자유와 권리 보호를 위해 「개인정보 보호법」 및 관계 법령이 정한 바를 준수하여, 적법하게 개인정보를 처리하고 안전하게 관리하고 있습니다. 이에 「개인정보 보호법」 제30조에 따라 정보주체에게 개인정보 처리에 관한 절차 및 기준을 안내하고, 이와 관련한 고충을 신속하고 원활하게 처리할 수 있도록 하기 위하여 다음과 같이 개인정보 처리방침을 수립·공개합니다.
주요 개인정보 처리 표시(라벨링)
목 차
3년
또는 회원탈퇴시까지5년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한3년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한2년
이상(개인정보보호위원회 : 개인정보의 안전성 확보조치 기준)개인정보파일의 명칭 | 운영근거 / 처리목적 | 개인정보파일에 기록되는 개인정보의 항목 | 보유기간 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
학술연구정보서비스 이용자 가입정보 파일 | 한국교육학술정보원법 | 필수 | ID, 비밀번호, 성명, 생년월일, 신분(직업구분), 이메일, 소속분야, 웹진메일 수신동의 여부 | 3년 또는 탈퇴시 |
선택 | 소속기관명, 소속도서관명, 학과/부서명, 학번/직원번호, 휴대전화, 주소 |
구분 | 담당자 | 연락처 |
---|---|---|
KERIS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 정보보호본부 김태우 | - 이메일 : lsy@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0439 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0195 |
KERIS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 개인정보보호부 이상엽 | |
RISS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 대학학술본부 장금연 | - 이메일 : giltizen@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0149 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0194 |
RISS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 학술진흥부 길원진 |
자동로그아웃 안내
닫기인증오류 안내
닫기귀하께서는 휴면계정 전환 후 1년동안 회원정보 수집 및 이용에 대한
재동의를 하지 않으신 관계로 개인정보가 삭제되었습니다.
(참조 : RISS 이용약관 및 개인정보처리방침)
신규회원으로 가입하여 이용 부탁 드리며, 추가 문의는 고객센터로 연락 바랍니다.
- 기존 아이디 재사용 불가
휴면계정 안내
RISS는 [표준개인정보 보호지침]에 따라 2년을 주기로 개인정보 수집·이용에 관하여 (재)동의를 받고 있으며, (재)동의를 하지 않을 경우, 휴면계정으로 전환됩니다.
(※ 휴면계정은 원문이용 및 복사/대출 서비스를 이용할 수 없습니다.)
휴면계정으로 전환된 후 1년간 회원정보 수집·이용에 대한 재동의를 하지 않을 경우, RISS에서 자동탈퇴 및 개인정보가 삭제처리 됩니다.
고객센터 1599-3122
ARS번호+1번(회원가입 및 정보수정)