인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 노동법이론실무학회 노동법포럼 노동법포럼 제36호
- 발행연도
- 2022.7
- 수록면
- 67 - 111 (45page)
- DOI
- 10.46329/LLF.2022.07.36.67
이용수
초록· 키워드
Recently, the Busan High Court ruled in the Hyundai Heavy Industries case and the National Labor Relations Commission(NLRC) ruled in the Hyundai Steel case. Both cases are cases in which labor unions of in-house subcontractors demanded collective bargaining from users of the contractor. The court denied the status of the original company"s users as the counterparty to collective bargaining. However, the NLRC acknowledged that the users of the original company were the counterparties to collective bargaining. The NLRC determined that the contractor has substantial control power, and that the contractor and the in-house subcontractor determine the working conditions of workers belonging to the in-house subcontracting company together. However, there is a problem that the theory of substantial control power cannot be a clear criterion for judgment because the concept is too ambiguous. The theory of substantial control power cannot function properly as a criterion for determining the user"s status as a counterparty to collective bargaining, and there is a concern that it seriously damages legal stability. In fact, in the case of Hyundai Steel, the NLRC misjudged the theory of substantial control power due to misunderstanding of the manufacturing process and the ‘MES’ system.
We tried to create a standard of judgment that best fits the interpretation of the Korean Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act(TULRA) on whether it is an employer as a collective bargaining counterpart and minimizes errors in interpretation. The most basic principle is that it should basically be a party to a labor contract.
In addition, we proposed four criteria : to be an employer as an agreement subject on working conditions, to be an employer who is obligated to pay wages, salaries, and equivalent money, to be a user who fulfills his(her) obligations under the Labor Relations Act, and to be a user who directs and manages work.
We tried to create a standard of judgment that best fits the interpretation of the Korean Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act(TULRA) on whether it is an employer as a collective bargaining counterpart and minimizes errors in interpretation. The most basic principle is that it should basically be a party to a labor contract.
In addition, we proposed four criteria : to be an employer as an agreement subject on working conditions, to be an employer who is obligated to pay wages, salaries, and equivalent money, to be a user who fulfills his(her) obligations under the Labor Relations Act, and to be a user who directs and manages work.
#단체교섭
#사내하청 노동조합
#단체교섭의 상대방
#계약의 상대방
#실질적 지배력
#중앙노동위원회
#collective bargaining
#a labor unions of in-house subcontractors
#a legitimate party of collective bargaining
#a party to a labor contract
#theory of substantial control power
#the National Labor Relations Commission(NLRC)
상세정보 수정요청해당 페이지 내 제목·저자·목차·페이지정보가 잘못된 경우 알려주세요!
목차
- Ⅰ. 문제의 소재
- Ⅱ. 최근 하급심판결과 중앙노동위원회 판정의 내용 및 문제점
- Ⅲ. 단체교섭 상대방으로서의 사용자 결정의 기준
- Ⅳ. 보론 : ILO 핵심협약 발효 이후 국내 노조법 적용의 원칙
- Ⅴ. 맺음말
- 참고문헌
- Abstract
참고문헌
참고문헌 신청최근 본 자료
