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
Since long ago, discussions have continued to correct the discrimination according to the form of employment, non-regular employment in South Korea and Japan. In addition, at the center of the discussions, there was the principle of “equal pay for equal (value) work” that if one does the same work (labor with the same value), one should get the same pay (equal treatment). The principle played an important role in systematizing the system for the prohibition of sexual discrimination in employment in South Korea and Japan, but it was not acknowledged as the ground for the regulation of discrimination according to the form of employment. However, the increase of non-regular employment causes various social problems such as low birth rate and aging phenomenon as well as the increase of the population of poverty or the increase of social security costs. Like this, South Korea and Japan sought a solution for a legislative policy to correct the gap in the treatment of non-regular employees with a similar historical background and have shown different aspects in the process of developing legislation.
To compare legislation in the two countries, briefly, concerning labor conditions, Japan regulates the treatment of non-regular workers by equal treatment and balanced treatment (prohibition of unreasonable labor condition) as compared to regular workers and judges the irrationality of discrimination, considering the contents of job, the range of placement change and other circumstances. On the other hand, South Korea does not have a regulation on the equal treatment of regular and non-regular workers and just prohibits disadvantageous treatment without a reasonable cause, concerning the gap in labor conditions, etc. (balanced treatment) The reasonable cause is not specified in the law, concretely, but it depends on interpretation. Since in South Korea, discriminatory treatment is judged, according to whether there is “rationality” or not, the judgment of rationality is the core of this system, and preparing unified standards is an important challenge. In this sense, the contents of the guidelines for equal pay for equal work in Japan or the outline of the bill, which promote the clarification of the judgment of irrationality, can be referred in judging discrimination remedy.
In the meantime, in South Korea, discussions continue, concerning the equal treatment of regular workers and non-regular workers. Concretely, it is left to an interpretation, whether the form of employment should be included in “social status” in the regulations on equal treatment (Article 6) of the Labor Standards Act, or whether the cases in which there are no “reasonable causes” in the fixed-term and part-time employee protection act can be subject to equal treatment. In addition, how to resolve the gap in the treatment between regular workers and non-regular workers, which depends on interpretation like this, comes to the fore as a task, legislatively, so it is judged that precedents in Japan can be referred for South Korea’s legislative policies.
To compare legislation in the two countries, briefly, concerning labor conditions, Japan regulates the treatment of non-regular workers by equal treatment and balanced treatment (prohibition of unreasonable labor condition) as compared to regular workers and judges the irrationality of discrimination, considering the contents of job, the range of placement change and other circumstances. On the other hand, South Korea does not have a regulation on the equal treatment of regular and non-regular workers and just prohibits disadvantageous treatment without a reasonable cause, concerning the gap in labor conditions, etc. (balanced treatment) The reasonable cause is not specified in the law, concretely, but it depends on interpretation. Since in South Korea, discriminatory treatment is judged, according to whether there is “rationality” or not, the judgment of rationality is the core of this system, and preparing unified standards is an important challenge. In this sense, the contents of the guidelines for equal pay for equal work in Japan or the outline of the bill, which promote the clarification of the judgment of irrationality, can be referred in judging discrimination remedy.
In the meantime, in South Korea, discussions continue, concerning the equal treatment of regular workers and non-regular workers. Concretely, it is left to an interpretation, whether the form of employment should be included in “social status” in the regulations on equal treatment (Article 6) of the Labor Standards Act, or whether the cases in which there are no “reasonable causes” in the fixed-term and part-time employee protection act can be subject to equal treatment. In addition, how to resolve the gap in the treatment between regular workers and non-regular workers, which depends on interpretation like this, comes to the fore as a task, legislatively, so it is judged that precedents in Japan can be referred for South Korea’s legislative policies.
#동일가치노동 동일임금
#비정규직보호법
#비정규직차별금지
#비정규직처우개선
#균등처우
#사회적 신분
#고용형태
#일본비정규직법 개정
#Equal pay for equal work
#Non-regular employment protection law
#Non regular work prohibition on discrimination
#Improving the treatment of non-regular employment
#Equal treatment
#Social status
#Form of employment
#Revision of non-regular employment law in Japan
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 동일노동 동일임금에 관한 법이론의 형성
Ⅲ. 비정규균등법제의 전개
Ⅳ. 비정규균등법제의 최근 개정 동향
Ⅴ. 마치며
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (33)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
The Discourse of Non-Regular Employment Policies: Comparative Analysis between South Korea and Japan
사회과학 담론과 정책
2023 .04
-
비정규직 근로자의 고용상 문제점과 개선방안에 대한 연구
법이론실무연구
2017 .08
-
중국 비정규 고용에 관한 연구 - 발전과정, 현황 및 법적 규제를 중심으로
중국연구
2015 .07
-
비정규직 사회복지사의 일 경험에 관한 현상학적 연구
보건과 복지
2020 .03
-
비정규직·무기계약직에 대한 차별의 합리성에 관한 판단법리
노동법논총
2021 .08
-
의료기관 정규직과 비정규직의 직무만족 비교연구
보건행정학회지
2015 .01
-
비정규직 보호법의 차별 시정 효과
한국사회정책
2018 .12
-
누가 정규직이 되는가? -비정규직 일자리의 가교 기능 검토-
입법과 정책
2021 .08
-
정규직-비정규직의 연대 형성에 관한 연구: 부산대학교병원지부 사례를 중심으로
산업노동연구
2024 .06
-
현장실험을 통해 분석한 비정규직의 정규직 전환에 따른 직무태도 변화에 관한 연구
산업관계연구
2020 .12
-
의료기관 비정규직의 차별경험과 삶의 질 관계 분석
한국병원경영학회지
2018 .01
-
공공기관의 비정규직 비율이 조직성과에 미치는 영향
한국사회와 행정연구
2018 .11
-
한국의 비정규직 근로자 실태 및 사회통합을 위한 정책방안
평화학연구
2015 .06
-
일본 비정규직 노동자 증가의 요인분석
일본근대학연구
2016 .01
-
비정규직보호법이 취약계층의 고용에 미치는 영향 분석과 시사점
규제연구
2019 .06
-
Work-related Attitudes of Non-regular and Regular Workers in Korea : Exploring Distributive Justice as a Mediator
Journal of Asian Sociology
2016 .06
-
비정규직 노동자의 심리적 어려움에 대한 질적 연구: 근로계약 체결 반복 경험을 중심으로
복지상담교육연구
2023 .04
-
지역 방송사 비정규직 노동자의 조직 내 위상
지역과 커뮤니케이션
2024 .08
-
Job Mobility of Non-Regular Workers in the Segmented Labor Markets : a Cross-national Comparison of South Korea and Japan
Journal of Asian Sociology
2017 .06
-
정규직-비정규직간 훈련격차와 임금효과
노동경제논집
2020 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
일본의 장시간 노동의 해소 정책 : 시간외노동시간 상한규제와 근무 간 인터벌 규제
이나경
한국노사관계학회 학술대회
2018
.06
제4차 산업혁명이 노동법제에 미치는 영향 : 일본에서의 논의를 중심으로
송강직
중앙법학
2018
.06
일본의 노동법개혁과 그 시사점
정영훈
강원법학
2017
.10
일본 비정규고용의 임금격차해소를 위한 ‘동일노동 동일임금’ 지침의 개요와 과제
조상균
산업관계연구
2017
.06
일본의 파견법개정과정을 통해 본 노동정책과정의 변화 : 비정치적 심의회 정책결정에서 당파성 정치로의 변화
정혜윤
평화연구
2018
.04
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2018-336-001692557