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.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
This article is a review of a decision of Seoul High Court(SHC 2016Na2030683), in which National Road Keepers(heareafter NRKs) seek damages arising from contravention of the equal treatment clause of the Labor Standards Act(LSA)(s.6). In this case, they maintain that they are treated less favorably than their chosen comparators, namely Civil Servants doing natonal-road-keeping(hereafter CSNRKs). The High Court upheld the decision of the court of the first instance, in which the NRKs’ claim for damages was rejected on the grounds that the CSNRKs are not proper comparators to the NRKs.
The NRKs are Workers of Indefinite Contract(hereafter WICs). The WICs have brought a lot of claims similar to the NRKs’. They have no choice but to rely on the equal treatment clause(s.6) of the LSA, as there are no other statutes in which their discrimination claims are able to be brought about. They are differ from part-time or fixed-term workers, whose claims for discrimination are relyed on the statute regarding non-standard workers although it is often claimed that they are less favourably treated than standard workers.
The article firstly is aimed at analysing cases on the equal treatment clause with a view to find proper stages to reach a conclusion on whether there is contravention of the clause. Secondly the article suggests that there should be 4 stages of construction in order to consider a case on the equal treatment clause. The stages are a) discrimination grounds b) comparators c) unfavourable treatment d) reasonableness. In this regard, the article maintains that the court’s decisions have not made a clear distinction between stages of construction. Thirdly, the article explores how to make an proper construction of each stage in turn.
In regard to the first stage of construction, the article argues that the statues of the WICs is a kind of ‘social status’, which is one of the discrimination grounds in the equal treatment clause with sex, nationality and religion. On the second stage of construction, it argues that the comparators do equal work to that of the WICs, excluding any consideration on, for instance, the difference of recruitment process. Thirdly, it maintains that reasonableness in the fourth stage is constructed on the basis of the proportionality test. Finally it concludes that this case deserves reconsideration in the Supreme Court on the basis of the 4 stages of construction.
The NRKs are Workers of Indefinite Contract(hereafter WICs). The WICs have brought a lot of claims similar to the NRKs’. They have no choice but to rely on the equal treatment clause(s.6) of the LSA, as there are no other statutes in which their discrimination claims are able to be brought about. They are differ from part-time or fixed-term workers, whose claims for discrimination are relyed on the statute regarding non-standard workers although it is often claimed that they are less favourably treated than standard workers.
The article firstly is aimed at analysing cases on the equal treatment clause with a view to find proper stages to reach a conclusion on whether there is contravention of the clause. Secondly the article suggests that there should be 4 stages of construction in order to consider a case on the equal treatment clause. The stages are a) discrimination grounds b) comparators c) unfavourable treatment d) reasonableness. In this regard, the article maintains that the court’s decisions have not made a clear distinction between stages of construction. Thirdly, the article explores how to make an proper construction of each stage in turn.
In regard to the first stage of construction, the article argues that the statues of the WICs is a kind of ‘social status’, which is one of the discrimination grounds in the equal treatment clause with sex, nationality and religion. On the second stage of construction, it argues that the comparators do equal work to that of the WICs, excluding any consideration on, for instance, the difference of recruitment process. Thirdly, it maintains that reasonableness in the fourth stage is constructed on the basis of the proportionality test. Finally it concludes that this case deserves reconsideration in the Supreme Court on the basis of the 4 stages of construction.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2023-336-001343818
