The Korean Enterprises Federation (KEF) expressed issues on Dec. 26 that the federal government’s tips for the s–called “Yellow Envelope Act” (Commerce Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act Articles 2 and three modification) specify the scope of employers and topics of labor disputes in a very complete and unclear method.
The Ministry of Employment and Labor introduced the Revised TULRAA Interpretation Tips (Draft) on Dec. 26. The federal government introduced judgment standards for the expanded scope of “employer” beneath Article 2, Paragraph 2 of the revised TULRAA and judgment standards for topics of labor disputes together with enterprise administration selections affecting working situations beneath Article 2, Paragraph 5.
The KEF identified that concerning the ministry’s presentation of “structural management over working situations” together with workforce administration, working hours, and work strategies as key standards for figuring out employer standing, “By citing ‘risk of terminating subcontract or consignment contracts in case of contract non-compliance’ for example of structural management, there’s room for misunderstanding that contract termination because of basic contract breach in subcontract agreements would even be topic to structural management.”
The federation additionally said, “Within the case of occupational security, specifying that substantial management could be acknowledged when considerably dominating and controlling the general industrial security and well being system is excessively complete, elevating issues that employer standing is likely to be interpreted as being acknowledged even for prime contractors’ success of security and well being measure obligations towards subcontractor employees beneath the Occupational Security and Well being Act.”
The KEF criticized that the rules additionally current topics of labor disputes unclearly. The federation said, “Within the case of Article 2, Paragraph 5, whereas it specifies that enterprise administration selections themselves aimed toward company organizational modifications equivalent to mergers, divisions, transfers, and gross sales aren’t topics of collective bargaining, it stipulates that collective bargaining calls for equivalent to employment safety calls for could be made when layoffs, job transfers, and many others. are objectively anticipated because of such enterprise administration selections,” including that “‘objectively anticipated circumstances’ is an unclear idea that may render meaningless the judgment criterion that enterprise administration selections equivalent to mergers and divisions themselves aren’t topics of collective bargaining.”
The KEF appealed, “The examples and associated content material must be clearly organized in accordance with the judgment standards for employers and topics of labor disputes specified within the tips to stop confusion at industrial websites through the early implementation of the revised TULRAA.”
