<![CDATA[Korea Labor Institute - Industrial Relations & HRM]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2020-02) 2019 Review of Industrial Relations and Outlook for 2020 ]]> I. Statistics on 2019 Industrial Relations

II. Assessment of 2019 Industrial Relations

III. Industrial Relations in 2020—Outlook and Challenges

* This working paper was originally written and published in Korean, on January 15th, 2020 in the KLI Employment and Labor Brief (2020-01).]]>
<![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2019-02) 2018 Review of Industrial Relations and Outlook for 2019 ]]> -  Jeong-Hee Lee]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2018-08) Direction and Challenges of Establishing Subsidiaries of the Public Institutions ]]> - Soonwon Kwon, Kyetaik Oh]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2018-07) Job Grade and Wage System of Indefinite-term Contract Workers in Public Sector ]]> -Kyetaik Oh(Associate Fellow, KLI)]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2018-04) Analysis of Current Status and Characteristics of Multiple Union Establishment ]]> - Jungwoo Kim(Head of Workplace Panel Survey Team, Center for Panel Data Analysis, KLI)]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2018-03) Workplace Harassment: Current Status and Systematic Measures for Improvement ]]> - Keun-Ju Kim and Kyung Hee Lee(Research Fellow, KLI)]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2017-16/Employment and Labor Policies in Transition: Labor) Innovation Needed for Workplace Innovation Policies ]]> - Kiu-Sik Bae and Chang-Won Lee (Senior Research Fellow, KLI)]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2017-14/Employment and Labor Policies in Transition: Labor) Towards a Grand Transformation_Designing a New Social Dialogue Regime in Korea ]]> - Hong-Geun Chang and Myung-Joon Park (Senior Research Fellow, Research Fellow KLI)]]> <![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2017-03/Employment and Labor Policies in Transition: Labor) Debate on Reform Measures for the Collective Bargaining Framework ]]>
- Jeong-Hee Lee (Research Fellow, KLI)
- Keun-Ju Kim (Research Fellow, KLI)]]>
<![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2017-02/Employment and Labor Policies in Transition: Labor) Overview: Transition of Industrial Relations System and Labor Policy ]]>
- Seong-Jae Cho (Director-General of Industrial Relations Research Division, KLI)]]>
<![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2017-01) Development of Employment Relations in Korean Companies Operating in China ]]>
Seong-Jae Cho]]>
<![CDATA[ (Working Paper 2016-03) Non-Union Attempts at Representing the Interests of Peripheral Workers ]]>
Myung-Joon Park, Ee-Sun Kim]]>
<![CDATA[ Pay Systems in Korea: Improvements and Evaluations ]]>
- Changwon Lee]]>
<![CDATA[ Review of Industrial Relations in 2014 and Outlook for 2015 ]]>
-Myung-Joon Park
]]>
<![CDATA[ Directions for Improving Korea’s Employment Legislation to Reduce the Duality of the Labor Market ]]>
Hoon Kim]]>
<![CDATA[ Labor-Management Bargaining Strategies Aimed at Improving the Wage Structure ]]>
Seong-Jae Cho]]>
<![CDATA[ Extending the Retirement Age and Improving the Wage Structure: An Industry-by-Industry Approach ]]> Extending the Retirement Age and Improving the Wage Structure: An Industry-by-Industry Approach
- Changwon Lee
]]>
<![CDATA[ Working Hours in Korea: Long Hours and Hour Reduction ]]> <![CDATA[ Diagnosis of the Korean Industrial Relations System and Directions for Future Development ]]> <![CDATA[ Corporate Social Responsibility and Labor Relations: Its Impacts and Implications ]]> - Changwon Lee, Director of Center for Wage and Job Research, Korea Labor Institute]]> <![CDATA[ Shift System Reform and Working Hours Reduction at Auto Parts Manufacturers ]]>  - Kiu-Sik Bae, Senior Research Fellow, Korea Labor Institute]]> <![CDATA[ Labor Dispute Resolution System of Korea: Status and Areas of Improvement ]]> - Sung-Hee Lee, Research Fellow, Korea Labor Institute]]> <![CDATA[ Collective Disputes and Dispute Resolution Systems in South Korea ]]> (Dr. Kiu-Sik Bae, Director-General of Labor Relations Policy Research Division, KLI)
]]>
<![CDATA[ Rebuilding the Employee Representation System: Necessity and Basic Direction ]]> (Dr. Hoon Kim and Prof. Jong-Hee Park)]]> <![CDATA[ Case Studies of Long Working Hours in Korea―With a Focus on the Banking and Auto Parts Industries ]]> (Kiu-Sik Bae, Director-General of Labor Relations and Social Policy Research Division, Korea Labor Institute)

]]>
<![CDATA[ The Skill Development Regime and Industrial Relations in Korea ]]> (Hong-Geun Chang, Research Fellow, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ Skill Development Regimes and Industrial Relations ]]> (Hong-Geun Chang, Research Fellow, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ Outlook on 2011 Wage Bargaining and Collective Bargaining ]]> (Jeong-Han Kim, Director-General, Labor Relations and Social Policy Research Division, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ International Comparative Study on Management of the Human Resource Market: With a Focus on Private Employment Agencies? ]]> (Hou, Zengyan, Institute of International Labor and Social Security)]]> <![CDATA[ Labor-Management Relations: 2010 Review and 2011 Outlook ]]> (Sung-Hee Lee, Research Fellow, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ Promoting Part-Time: With a Focus on Permanent Part-Time Jobs ]]> (Dr.Kiu-Sik Bae, Director, International Cooperation and Information Office, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ Promoting Regional Employment Policies ]]> Promoting Regional Employment Policies
(Dr. Myung-Sook Jun, Director, International Cooperation and Information Office, Korea Labor Institute)

]]>
<![CDATA[ Job-Creation Capacity of the Service Industry ]]> Job-Creation Capacity of the Service Industry
(Dr.Soo-Kyeong Hwang,  The author is a former Research Fellow at the Korea Labor Institute and a current Research Fellow at the Korea Development Institute)

]]>
<![CDATA[ Study on the Public Employment Service System Reengineering ]]> Study on the Public Employment Service System Reengineering
(Dr.Yongkui Wang, Vice Director, Labor and Social Security Standard Study Office, Chinese Academy of Labour and Social Security (CALSS))

]]>
<![CDATA[ The New Structure of Local Employment Governance and Tasks for Labor, Management, and Government ]]> (Dr.Myung-sook Jun, Director, International Cooperation and Information Office, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ Industrial Relations in 2009: Outlook and Policy Tasks ]]> (Dr.Hoon Kim, Director, Advanced Labor-Management Relations Program, Korea Labor Institute)]]> <![CDATA[ Temp-to-perm transition?: the recent legislation of fixed-term employment and firm’s choice ]]> ※ Hyunji Kwon, Lecturer, Department of Management, Kings College London, U.K. Dr. Kwon was a former Research Fellow of the Korea Labor Institute (Jan. 1, 2007-Dec. 31, 2008).


Introduction

The Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Employees (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has got lost although it has been only one and a half years since it saw the light. Although the pressure for the revision of the Act has become particularly intense since the Korean economy went into a downturn, the dissent from the purport of the Act was already considerable from the beginning.
In the early stage of implementation, which followed 4 years of vigorous discussion, and controversies, neither labor nor management hid their respective dissatisfactions. Aside from its own incompleteness, an inevitable consequence of political compromise, its objective of “flexicurity” inherently promised conflict from both parties.
In fact, contract termination at one of the largest retailer occurred en masse even before the law went into effect, prompting fierce labor-management standoffs at its affiliates that led to prolonged disputes. Some, claiming these incidents were an unavoidable result of the Act, called for its abolishment or at least major revision. Others argued that the Act would significantly suppress hiring. Yet, it is still noteworthy that benefits of the Act were also visible and merited attention. Many customer service industries, particularly the financial sector where fixed-term employment had become a norm for frontline service jobs since the economic crisis in 1997 have witnessed a significant extent of temp-to-perm transition in various forms. Although, as some criticized, temp-to-perm arrangements were often dissatisfactory because unprivileged HRM packages were imposed to the transferred(creating to the new term “quasi-regular”), the Act have provided positive expectation for better working conditions including job security with qualified irregular workers. The trend toward temp-to-perm transition stimulated by the Act also marks the beginning of the labor market correction of the unfair use of nonstandard workforce to take advantage of regulatory loopholes.
It must be noted that these mixed outcomes also demonstrate the impact of industrial relations on the labor market. The new Act left open some space for each organization to make its own decisions on how to use nonstandard workers. As a matter of fact, successful negotiation between labor and management was a key in most cases with major temp-to-perm transition. Each case shows that the union’s consistent leadership and bargaining skills as well as the two sides’ elastic strategies based on mutual trust may determine the ultimate success of this Act.
This paper assesses the influence of the new regulation of fixed-term work arrangements on the firms’ decision of temp-to-perm transition and labor market outcomes. It also examines key factors and challenges involved in firms’ choices among different options.
Case study is a vehicle to conduct this study. In fact, I selected sites for visit if the firm had decided a significant level of temp-to-perm transition until the mid of July. The companies were identified through a variety of channels such as media reports and the Ministry of Labor’s list created by the local offices. Dozen companies were selected for site-visits with a considera-tion of sectoral composition and accessibility. In fact, the number of cases that made temp-to-term decision as of the July 2007 were still quite limited because the law allows firms to save 2 years to carry the very practice and, in addition, most firms wanted to wait and see what other firms do before they take their own steps.
The cases include six financial institutions (including both commercial and investment banking), two retailers, and four other service companies (per agreement with the respondents, company names are not revealed). In fact, most of the analysis was done with the financial institutions, and the other firms were used for reference purposes, which as some reasons. Most financial institutions employed a larger group of fixed-term workers, and had constantly renewed employment contracts with their fixed-term service workers who had been building up service and sales skills for many years. And thus they have many reasons to get through serious cost-benefit analysis of whether they want to retain their nonstandard workers or not.
I interviewed HR managers who were in charge of staffing, but in cases where such in-terviews did not come to pass, the alternative interviewees were switched to union managers. In more than a half of the cases, in any case, I conducted separate interviews with both labor and management, each of which took 2 hours on average.
Before discussing the actual cases, this paper, with the help of the recently released re-sults of the Supplementary on Nonstandard Workers, Economically Active Population Survey in March 2008, conducted by the National Statistical Office, will first look at the general changes perceived to have been brought about by the legislation. Then the details of the cases will be discussed within the context of change.]]>
<![CDATA[ Participants in the Performing Arts Sector: Artists or Workers? ]]> ※ Research Fellow, Korea Labor Institute


Stage actors feed on morning dew? Are you proud of that?

“This producer was telling me that they’ll be doing something as a professional theater company. Rehearsal is two months and the show lasts one month. And this guy, this representative, tells me, ‘We’ll pay you 3 million won.’ So I tell him, ‘You $@&%. Have you ever tried living for three months on 3 million won? I have two children, and what, stage actors feed on morning dew? Are you proud of that?’” (Mr. C, actor. Interview, March 2007)

The Korea Labor Institute (KLI) conducted a status survey in 2007 of 273 members of the theater and musical sector-actors, producers, playwrights, and staff members-as part of its project “Professional Workforce Structure and Policy Support in the Performing Arts Sector: with a Focus on Theater and Musicals.” The survey revealed the average monthly wage for this sector to be 1.583 million won and the hourly wage to be 145,000 won (Hwang et al., 2007), figures that show that the actor quoted above was by no means lying.

An hourly wage of 145,000 won (4 times 3,480 won, the statutory minimum wage as of 2007) implies that, based on income alone, the socioeconomic status of these participants may not be that low. But the average monthly income figure of 1.583 million won contradicts this impression. Given that a similarly timed survey (done in the first half of 2007) revealed the average monthly total income of full-time workers in all nonagricultural businesses with 5 or more employees to be 2.575 million won, it is not hard to imagine the conditions surrounding the working lives of those in the performing arts (Ministry of Labor, 2007). ]]>
<![CDATA[ Policies and Tasks for Life-long Career Skills Development ]]>
** Jooseop Kim (Research at the Korea Labor Institute (jskim@kli.re.kr))


Ⅰ. Presentation of the Issue

Skills-oriented technology development, knowledge-base industry, and globalization are the buzz words that characterize the evolution of todays economic and social environment, which adds higher premium to skills, which in turn leads to the further polarization based on the knowledge levels as generally forecasted. While higher levels of skills for job performance are required, the lifespan of technologies has shortened quite dramatically thanks to the on-going technology innovation. All such rapid changes require not only individuals but also countries to be better prepared to respond. This is not limited to Korea. All the other advanced countries that have experienced rapid advance of technologies are required to come up with a thorough plan to respond to the changes. Drawing most attention in this environment of rapid change is the policy for the development and reinforcement of life-long career. The education during the school-age years is not enough to ensure that a person is fully equipped with the sufficient career skills to cover ones life span and in addition, the number of years during which the knowledge picked up during those school-age years is utilized in the industrial field is getting shorter than ever. There is no denying of the fact that the policies need to be set up to reinforce the education and training following the regular school years education. In case of Korea, the life-long career development policy has been updated over the recent five years; however, it has failed to come up with the solutions to the deep-rooted issues in Korea. Lets have a look at the most basic index: participation in the life-long career skills development programs. Korea is ranked as one of the lowest among the major OECD members with the participation ratio of 15%. When measuring the performance of the life-long career skills development using the indexes indicating the changes in the positions in the labor market, the overall record is very low as well. All these led to the vicious cycle of the low performance of the life-long career skills development→lack of participation in the life-long career skills development activities→lack of development of the career skills development industry→low effect or end benefits for the participants. Rapid ageing of the society, and other changes endemic to the Korean environment also make it necessary to improve the quantity and quality of the life-long career skills development programs so that more people can join the useful activities for life-long skills development. With this understanding of the issue in mind, this paper will have a look at the performance and limits of the life-long career skills development policies implemented in Korea over the past five years, the features of the changes in the environment, and the future directions that the life-long career skills development policies need to follow in Korea in the future. ]]>
<![CDATA[ 20 Years in Korea’s Industrial Relations : Based on Statistics on Union Structure and Industrial Disputes ]]>
I. Introduction

This year marks the 20th anniversary of the explosive labor movement in Korea which occurred in July and August 1987. In defiance of the low wages and excessive working hours that were enforced during the “Development First” era which exerted a quasi-military control over labor, numerous unions were established and a struggle ensued for higher wages, leading to the birth of a new labor order. What, then, are the basic characteristics of this “1987 Labor Regime”? Has this Regime remained intact during the past 20 years, or has it experienced a qualitative change since the financial crisis? And, in view of such developments, what is in store for the future?
Addressing such questions will be key to building the intellectual foundation for overcoming the current impasse in industrial relations and opening the doors to a more productive future. This paper aims not to directly answer these questions, but to provide readers with an easily accessible summary of government statistics related to such issues. Data collected by the Ministry of Labor on union structure and industrial disputes have not been widely publicized due to considerations for the protection of enterprise and union information, difficulties in surveying such organizations and the sometimes-indefinite data collection criteria. It would therefore seem useful for a government-sponsored research institute to organize such data and provide it for use by labor, management and other scholars and researchers. On the 20th anniversary of Korea’s revitalized labor movement and the development of ‘new’ industrial relations, this paper provides readers with a portion of a larger study commissioned by the Ministry of Labor with the hope that such shared insight can spur further practical and academic discussion and research on this topic. ]]>
<![CDATA[ Assessment of Industrial Relations in 2006 and Forecasts for 2007 ]]> <![CDATA[ Assessment of the "1997 Industrial Relations Model" : from the Perspective of Social Responsibility ]]> <![CDATA[ Industrial Unionization: Costs and Benefits ]]> <![CDATA[ Labor-Management Relations in the Metal Industry after the Conversion into Industrial Union ]]> The series of changes are part of the Korean Metal Workers Federation ("Metal Federation") under the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) to become a full-blown industrial union by the target deadline of October. As the Metal Federation already boasts strong organization and militancy, its transformation into a formal industrial union will be the decisive factor in upgrading the Korean labor-management relations from the "1987 labor regime" to the "2007 labor regime." It was initially expected that the 2007 regime will take shape through conflicts over legal amendment (plural unionism and remuneration ban against full-time union officials) and polarization (establishment of non-regular workers union), but now it is apparent that the simultaneous organizational shift in the three automakers unions will play that role, precipitating the collapse of the 1987 labor regime (based on company-level industrial relations) and building the 2007 labor regime (based on supra-company bargaining). It should be reminded that it had long been expected that Hyundai Autos union will provide the critical point necessary to tip the Korean industrial relations over from company-based to industry-based.
Leading up to the vote, many outside observers, experts and the media were unsure of the result, citing the apparent self-centeredness of large automakers unions consisting of regular workers, which would effectively prevent the conversion into an industrial union that would require rescinding of their vested interests. History also seemed to back their argument, as the Hyundai union already suffered a setback three years ago, when only 62% agreed to become an industrial union. Many had opined then that even the 62% was unexpectedly high. Despite the experience and forecast, however, all three automakers unions achieved high approval of over 70% in this round of voting, the reasons for which are suspected as follows. First, a consensus has been formed among the union members that organizing at the industry level may cause disadvantages in wage but enhance job security. In that sense, it is an understandable decision on their part, especially considering that even employees of large companies have been anxious about their job security, with the recent modularization and outsourcing. Another important factor was that there was almost no divisive force this time, in the form of conflicts between different factions or even opposition campaign behind the leadership, as they actively and systematically attempt to educate and persuade the rank-and-file. Industry-level organization has been a longstanding cause for the labor movement for the past few decades, which meant that even if the credit went to another faction, there was little to be gained from fighting against it. Another likely factor at play is the increasingly likely scenario that failure at industrial union would lead to mutual demise, especially with the impending remuneration ban against full-time union officials and approval of plural unionsim.
One remarkable development at the three automakers voting is the high approval rate of not only the production/technical workers but also the sales and maintenance workers. The result shows signs that many workers, regardless of jobs, will stand behind the cause of industrial union, a fact that will have a significant meaning on the breadth of membership in the supra-company union. In addition, the shift to industrial union by automakers unions, which, in terms of organization, finances, human resources and militancy, have been leading the Korean labor movement, will have a significant influence, both in changing the stance of other, non-industrialized workplace unions and in stimulating the already industrialized unions, especially at the supra-company level bargaining.
Then how will the industrial union take shape, how will the industrial-level bargaining unfold, and what will be the characteristics that define the "2007 labor regime"? It is as yet an enormous challenge to answer these questions. The only agreement so far is that some kind of transitional confusion will be unavoidable in the course of altering the type of organization and bargaining methods. The current uncertainties require more in-depth studies and discussion on how to keep the level and duration of the confusion to the minimum and ensure stability and effectiveness in the new labor-management relations. This paper aims to help create a more scientific scenario for the labor, management and government, by enumerating some of the checkpoints in the course of this transition, with the auto industry primarily in mind. It should be stated at the outset that the discussion here is based on an logical imagination rather than on scientific proof.]]>
<![CDATA[ The Present and Future of Human Resources Management in Korean Companies ]]> The focus of human resources management in companies following the financial crisis shifted from the internal labor market to the external labor market, from groups and seniority to individuals and performance, from people to task, from vertical structures to horizontal structures, from domestic market to international market, and from standard talent to specialized talent. (Yeon Ang JUNG, 2000) However, efforts for such changes stirred resistance from members of each organization and labor unions, and did not necessarily result in desirable results, which is displayed by the fact that although Korean companies shifted to a performance-based human resources management paradigm after the financial crisis, they still suffer from a dilemma between people-based and task-based human recourses management, seniority-based and performance-based management, employment flexibility and wage flexibility, and internalization and externalization.
This paper plans to review the changes in the human resources management of Korean companies comparing numerous surveys before and after the financial crisis and against this backdrop, forecast future changes.
Surveys used in the paper are as follows. “Survey on the Evaluation System and Human Resources Management of Korean Companies" by the Korea Labor Institute (1998a) surveyed all listed companies (N=744) as of October 1998 with the respondents totaling 411 people in charge of planning and 418 people in charge of human resources management. "Survey on the Changes of Human Resources Organization Management during Restructuring" by the Korea Labor Institute (1998b) surveyed companies in the nonfarm business sector selected through random sampling in October 1998 with the respondents totaling 355 people in charge of human resources management of which 117 were from listed companies. "Survey on the Changes in Human Resources Management and Development of Job Skills following the Financial Crisis" by the Korea Labor Institute (2000) surveyed all listed companies (N=712) as of June 2000 with respondents totaling 400 people in charge of planning and 376 people in charge of human resources management. "Workplace Panel Survey" by the Korea Labor Institute (2002) surveyed companies in the nonfarm business sector selected through random sampling (N=2,000) in June 2002 with respondents totaling 1,820 people in charge of human resources management of which 192 were from listed companies. "Survey on Annual Salary Systems and Profit Sharing" by the Ministry of Labor (2005) surveyed all companies with 100 or more employees as of January 2005 with the respondents totaling 4,998 companies. The subjects for reviewing changes were limited to listed companies to enable time series comparisons. For example, in comparing the Korea Labor Institute (1998a) and the Korea Labor Institute (2000) with the Korea Labor Institute (1998b) and the Korea Labor Institute (2002), only the 117 listed companies and 192 listed companies from the last two surveys were used for the review. Yet, unlisted companies were included in analysis use to explain the current status, in which cases it has been specified in the notes. ]]>
<![CDATA[ Human Resource Development for the Auto Industry ]]> Despite its semi-core status within the national economy, the Korean auto industry still has big room for improvement, especially in the areas of core parts and finished car technologies. The industry needs to continuously develop cutting-edge technologies, absorb mature technologies and apply them with the view of furthering its international competitiveness. In all these endeavors, the key is human resources - talented labor must be supplied and improved upon on an ongoing basis. The Auto Industry Human Resource Development Council was established recently for this specific purpose. Seeking ways to more effectively and efficiently foster the talent required by the motor industry, the Council has called for an analysis into the labor demand-supply and training within the industry, as well as an overall development plan that includes an operational guideline for the Council. The call led to a study under my watch which produced the report, Human Resource Development in the Auto Industry: Present and Future. This paper will outline some of the main points of the report, with focus on its conclusions. The significance of the report is found in that it represents the first comprehensive study on labor demand-supply and training in the auto industry. It comprises interviews with a wide range of subjects, including members of the R&D, purchasing departments, parts suppliers and training institutes, as well as surveys on engineers of Hyundai/Kia and GM Daewoo (598) and parts suppliers (106). Especially noteworthy is the fact that, by evaluating three categories of jobs (R&D, production/craft, administration/managerial/sales), it is probably the first study of its kind in Korea that tries to identify the labor market characteristics and the demand-supply gap by job. This paper, with the recognition that policy attention is most urgently needed for small and medium parts suppliers (more so than finished car makers), will devote most of its discussion on the labor demand-supply and training based on the survey of parts companies. It will also present the possible way forward for the Auto Industry Human Resource Development Council. ]]> <![CDATA[ Tripartite Partnerships at Local Level and Their Social Pacts ]]> Against this backdrop, a natural question to be asked would be, "Would local-level labor relations continue to exist in the future, without any significant role to play, like now?". A short answer to that question would be "No." Local-level labor relations have been growing substantially and their importance will gradually increase, as well. The growing importance of local-level labor relations is clearly shown by the fact that the number of local labor unions has recently increased, and that the frequency of labor disputes concerning local issues is increasing, as shown in the areas of Ulsan and Yeocheon.
It is very important to decide how to approach the building of local-level labor relations. The importance is clearly shown by the fact that neither workers nor employers, not even the government can make local-level labor decisions by themselves arbitrarily, as they have done in the past. Considering the fact that local-level labor relations are being formed due to changes in the labor environment, such as globalization, decentralization and knowledge-based industrialization, a wise choice would be for workers, employers and the government to adapt the evolving local-level labor relations process to fit the current labor environment. But that wise choice could not be easily implemented if the workers, employers and the government of a region are hostile to one another. In addition, in trying to implement this change, due to the current lack of inter-relational capability and competency between workers, employers and the government, the probable resulting conflicts which would occur between them would only serve to further hurt the three groups.
In this vein, this paper explains that it is important to form a partnership among the workers, employers and the government of a region. The paper then briefly reviews the current conditions and social pacts of workers, employers and the government at the local-level in Korea. This method of writing is just the opposite of the usual method of placing the conclusion at the very end. This has been done to emphasize even further how important a local partnership is. ]]>
<![CDATA[ The Current Status and Outlook of the Government Employees’ Labor Relations ]]> However, the two largest government employees’ unions appear unlikely to report their establishments even after the enactment of the Public Officials’ Unions Act, suggestive of their rocky relationship with the government from early on. Nonetheless, Korea’s two major public officials’ unions have a slightly different take on the Public Officials’ Unions Act. It has been legislated as a special act and ensures the right to
organize and the collective bargaining right, but not the collective action right. The Korean Government Employees’ Union (KGEU) refuses to recognize this special act and demand the guarantee of three basic labor rights under the general statute. The Federation of Government Employees (FGE), on the other hand, seems willing to accept the special act if the right to organize is guaranteed to some degree.
This paper explores the current status of government employees’ trade unions and forecasts the potentially stormy labor relations in the public sector in 2006. ]]>
<![CDATA[ Labour-management cooperation to overcome the hold-up problem in capital investment ]]> <![CDATA[ Unions and the contingent workers: the Korean evidence ]]>