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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Recently, many countries are enacting the law of labor contract in order to establish or regulate a new order in labor contracts resulted from the diversified forms of labor, and the reduced importance of labor unions. The need for the law of labor contract is increasingly debated in Korea as well, with propositions at varying levels, such as securing national competitiveness in preparation of globalization, or establishing unified laws to systemically regulate labor relationship. All these propositions agree that the need of a capable and well suited new law that reflects the shifts in labor law paradigm and labor market mechanism is self-evident. Furthermore, there has been an increase of incentives and merit-based payment system, as well as employment of contingent staffs in recent years because of businesses adjusting hiring and personnel management strategies to cope with shifting business environment. As personnel management strategies becoming more individualized and diversified, laborers started to prefer self-regulating work in which they can realize creativity and professionalism with a higher level of motivation to do so. This change allowed employees to negotiate working conditions with the employers on equal ground in reality, making compromising any disputes between employees and employers in a swift and proper way more important. Doing so calls for an equitable and transparent rule as a basis of reference.
On the other hand, there is a concern that the purpose of the law of labor contract being misinterpreted as ‘breaking away from law protecting employees’, and used as a base to lessen the protection or apply more responsibilities of fidelity on employees. However, it is an undeniable fact that the definition of employment is changing and there are employees who can stand on equal terms with the employers armed with personal ability and professional knowledge owing to the diversification of employee-subordination levels. Even so, such employees are a rarity, and can’t be considered as a major cause in diluting the protective property of the Labor Law, not to mention of its necessity in the future. Furthermore, it would be impossible to abolish or revise the Labor Standard Act otherwise while protecting employees and maintaining the constitutional living rights to a minimum standard. Therefore, separating the Labor Standard Act from the Labor Law would be preferable to reorganizing the Labor Standard Act into the Labor Law.
Meanwhile, it is necessary to define the contracting parties and the nature of contracts if the law of labor contract is enacted. The Labor Law uses old terminologies to define the contracting parties - the employee, who provides a subordinate form of labor, and the employer, the consumer of such provided labor. But this traditional definition alone isn’t enough to identify who are the employee and employer these days. Identifying the employer of a contract is becoming difficult in an increasing number of cases, in which a complex relationship of involved business entities exists. Therefore, it is questionable if one should apply the traditional subordination based terminologies to the law of labor contract unmodified. Considering the purpose of the enactment of the law of labor contract is to clarify the right-responsibility relationship of contracting parties, preventing unnecessary disputes stemmed from diverse forms of employment, there wouldn’t be a need to narrowly define contracting parties. This is so because establishing a clear rule to quickly respond to future changes in labor environment is the legislative task at hand.
On the other hand, there is a concern that the purpose of the law of labor contract being misinterpreted as ‘breaking away from law protecting employees’, and used as a base to lessen the protection or apply more responsibilities of fidelity on employees. However, it is an undeniable fact that the definition of employment is changing and there are employees who can stand on equal terms with the employers armed with personal ability and professional knowledge owing to the diversification of employee-subordination levels. Even so, such employees are a rarity, and can’t be considered as a major cause in diluting the protective property of the Labor Law, not to mention of its necessity in the future. Furthermore, it would be impossible to abolish or revise the Labor Standard Act otherwise while protecting employees and maintaining the constitutional living rights to a minimum standard. Therefore, separating the Labor Standard Act from the Labor Law would be preferable to reorganizing the Labor Standard Act into the Labor Law.
Meanwhile, it is necessary to define the contracting parties and the nature of contracts if the law of labor contract is enacted. The Labor Law uses old terminologies to define the contracting parties - the employee, who provides a subordinate form of labor, and the employer, the consumer of such provided labor. But this traditional definition alone isn’t enough to identify who are the employee and employer these days. Identifying the employer of a contract is becoming difficult in an increasing number of cases, in which a complex relationship of involved business entities exists. Therefore, it is questionable if one should apply the traditional subordination based terminologies to the law of labor contract unmodified. Considering the purpose of the enactment of the law of labor contract is to clarify the right-responsibility relationship of contracting parties, preventing unnecessary disputes stemmed from diverse forms of employment, there wouldn’t be a need to narrowly define contracting parties. This is so because establishing a clear rule to quickly respond to future changes in labor environment is the legislative task at hand.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
Ⅱ. 근로계약법 제정 필요성
Ⅲ. 근로계약법 제정의 기본원칙
Ⅳ. 근로계약법의 적용대상
Ⅴ. 맺음말
【참고문헌】
【ABSTRACT】
참고문헌 (24)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
근로계약법의 이론적 정초
노동법학
2013 .12
-
근로계약법의 입법화를 둘러싼 일본에서의 최근 논의
기업법연구
2007 .03
-
일본 노동계약법의 성립배경 및 주된 내용·논점에 관한 연구
외법논집
2008 .01
-
일본에서의 제정 근로계약법의 내용과 분석
노동법연구
2008 .12
-
？？合同制度的政策基？？功能？突
외법논집
2007 .01
-
시대변혁기에 있어서 노동법의 역할
노동법포럼
2017 .02
-
사용종속관계의 새로운 기준 및 평가
노동법논총
2020 .04
-
근로계약법제의 도입에 대한 입법론적 고찰
외법논집
2007 .01
-
사용종속관계의 개념 및 기준
노동법논총
2018 .04
-
기업경영과 노동법제 개선방안
경영법률
2009 .01
-
Enactment of the Labor Contract Act and Its Significance for Japanese Labor Law
노동법학
2009 .12
-
중국과 일본의 근로계약법제와 입법론적 시사점
노동법논총
2008 .06
-
중국 근로계약법의 제정과정과 입법배경
중국법연구
2010 .01
-
사용자의 경영권과 근로자의 노동3권의 충돌에 관한 연구
산업관계연구
2007 .06
-
한국의 근로계약법제의 현황과 과제
노동법학
2009 .12
-
일본 근로계약법 제정과 그 시사점
法學論文集
2013 .01
-
근로계약법제의 도입을위한 기본원칙과 정책과제 - 개별성 · 유연성 · 명확성의 3대 원칙을 중심으로-
외법논집
2011 .01
-
노사자치의 한계와 노동법적 규제의 정당성
노동법학
2004 .12
-
고용환경의 변화, 노동법의 위기와 대응 : 노동보호법의 인적 적용범위를 중심으로
노동법학
2018 .09
-
노동법상 근로자ㆍ사용자 개념 확대를 둘러싼 쟁점과 입법적 과제
노동법학
2014 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-336-002867634