Ⅰ. Concept

Unfair labor practice refers to an employer’s violation of any of the three rights of labor: the right to independent association, collective bargaining, and collective action. The employer can intentionally destroy the function and activities of the labor union with anti-union animosity. Therefore, unfair labor practice by the employer must be prohibited in order to secure the basic rights of employees.

Ⅱ. Types of Unfair Labor Practice

1. Unfair treatment


Article 81 (Unfair Labor Practices)
1. Dismissal or unfavorable treatment of a worker on grounds that he has joined or intends to join a labor union, or has attempted to organize a labor union, or has performed any other lawful act for the operation of a labor union; and
2. Dismissal of workers or acting against their interests on the grounds that they participated in justifiable collective activities or that they reported to or testified before the Labor Relations Commission regarding the employer violating provisions of this Article, or that they presented other evidence to relevant administrative agencies.


Dismissal or unfavorable treatment of a worker on grounds that he/she has joined or intends to join a labor union, or has attempted to organize a labor union, or has performed any other lawful act for the operation of a labor union is unfair treatment.


[Cases Not Deemed Unfair Treatment]

① Disciplinary punishment of a labor union’s key officers, who have led or agitated the refusal of extended or night work that was already determined by the labor-management council, on account of activities of the union establishment
② Dismissal of an employee who has led a labor union establishment in foreign embassies where Korean labor laws are not applicable
③ Dismissal of a temporary or short-term employee whose contract has expired
④ Dismissal of an employee who has been expelled from the union for leading an illegal strike without justifiable procedures
⑤ Dismissal of an employee related to establishing and operating a social club, not related to labor union activities
⑥ Dismissal of an employee who has violated managerial orders on account of feigning career history, etc.
⑦ Dismissal of a union’s full-time officer who has been dismissed from the labor union for refusing to work at the department he/she belongs to
⑧ Dismissal of an employee who has been sentenced as a criminal for an incident not related to union activities
⑨ Disciplinary punishment of a nurse who has violated the rules of employment by wearing union clothes instead of a nurse’s uniform


(1) Is it unfair labor practice to promote a union officer to a position which does not allow him to belong to a labor union?

Whether a personnel order to a certain union member is an unfair labor practice or not shall be determined collectively in consideration of all factors, such as relations between the timing of the order and union activities, job necessity, eligibility and the rationale for the personnel selection, and the relations between the company and the labor union. Consideration will also be given to whether a personnel order is an attempt to violate the employees’ three rights. However, when a personnel order to a union member is implemented as a regular personnel order because of job necessity or general standards, such a personnel order shall not be deemed unfair labor practice.

(2) In cases where an employer fires an employee who staged a sit-in without the union’s resolution or instruction, this is not unfair labor practice.

An employee staged a sit-in and, in doing so, obstructed the business. Furthermore, the sit-in was not due to a union resolution or instruction but was simply on the employee’s own initiative. The employer’s decision to dismiss the employee on the grounds of the unauthorized sit-in does not constitute an act of unfair labor practice.

(3) If an employer promotes an employee who is entitled to join the union to a higher position which prevents him/her from joining the union, is this an act of unfair labor practice?

In order to determine whether such job promotion constitutes an act of unfair labor practice, it is necessary to consider the timing of the promotion, its impact on union activities, necessity of the promotion for business purposes, the employee’s job skills, reasonable nature of the promotion, etc. If the employer’s decision to promote the employee to a higher post was based on reasonable criteria for personnel management and the principle of equitability, the promotion is not an unfair labor practice, given that the employee had refused to accept the promotion.

(4) If an employer, with a view to interfering with union activities, transfers a union member to another location of work where it is not easy to perform union work, this is an act of unfair labor practice.

The employee in question played a leading role in expanding union membership and worked more than 20 years in the production department. He was first transferred to a job in the public affairs department, for which he had no experience, and was then removed to a remote office where he was not entitled to several employee benefits and could hardly do any union work as there were only three or four employees working. Unless the employer proves the necessity of such job transfer for business purposes, the transfer constitutes an unfair labor practice.

(5) If an employer transfers employees to a different location of work in order to prevent them from joining the union and doing union work, the employee transfer is an act of unfair labor practice.

The reason given by the employer for such employee transfer was to fill vacancies at the location to which they were transferred. The real reason, however, was to prevent them from joining the union and engaging in union activities. Therefore, the transfer amounts to an act of unfair labor practice. Furthermore, the dismissal of those employees because they failed to follow the transfer instructions also constitutes unfair dismissal.


2. Conditional contracts (yellow dog contract)


Article 81 (Unfair Labor Practices)
2. Employment of a worker on the condition that he should not join or should withdraw from a labor union, or on the condition that he should join a particular labor union, provided that in cases where the labor union represents two-thirds or more of the workers working in the workplace concerned, a collective agreement under which a person, who is employed on condition that he should join the labor union, shall be allowed as an exception. In such cases, no employer shall act against a worker on the grounds that the worker is excluded from the labor union concerned;


A yellow dog contract provides employment to a worker on the condition that he/she should not join or should withdraw from a particular union. The condition also guarantees continuous employment.

(1) It is illegal to strictly control admission to the labor union in the union shop contract.

The labor union is not allowed to refuse an eligible employee membership in the union. In cases where all employees join the labor union in accordance with the union shop provision in the collective agreement, the employer shall dismiss employees who withdraw from union membership upon the labor union’s request, despite the collective agreement being silent on the issue. Accordingly, when the labor union refuses admission of an employee, this will directly lead to a condition where the employer shall dismiss the employee because the employee does not hold union membership. Unless there is a special reason(e.g., he was expelled from the union) applicable to the union member, the union cannot reject/her his application for membership. It is illegal and unfair to have restrictions for membership. The restrictions typically found are that the employee must receive prior approval from the labor union in order to join the labor union or the employees who withdraw from union membership should receive a concurrent vote of a two-thirds majority of the members present in the representatives meeting or the general meeting if he wants to join the labor union after withdrawing. Accordingly, under no special condition, enforcing such restrictions is an abuse by the labor union in a good-faith principle.

(2) The scope of employees engaged in the workplace under the union shop contract.

According to the proviso of Article 81(2) of the Trade Union Act, in cases where a labor union represents at least a two-thirds majority of employees in the workplace concerned, a collective agreement, where every employee is hired on condition that he/she join the labor union, which is called a union shop contract, can be allowed as an exception. In these cases, the scope of employees engaged in the workplace means employees who are eligible for union membership among all employees by Article 2(1) of the Act, excluding an employer or other persons who always act in the interest of the employer according to Article 2(4) of the Act.

(3) If a collective agreement provides for a union shop system in which every employee is a member of the union, should the employer dismiss an employee who has departed from the union?

Under the union shop system, which is intended to strengthen the bond among the union members, a precondition for employment is to join the representative union. If a collective agreement includes a clause on union shop, the employer is obliged to dismiss an employee who has walked out of the union, even if there is no additional clause. However, the employer’s obligation to dismiss an employee departing from the union is simply his/her obligation under the collective agreement. It cannot always be said that the employer’s non-compliance with the obligation constitutes his/her unfair intervention in or domination over the union, which is an act of unfair labor practice.