Section 2: Individual Labor Relations
Chapter 8: Expiration of Employment Contract
4. Reasonable Reasons for Refusing Contract Renewal and Conversion to Non-fixed Term Employment Contract
4.4 Non-recognition of Reasonable Reasons for Refusing Contract Renewal for the Purpose of Evading Restrictions on Employment Period under the Fixed-Term Employment Act
| Supreme Court Decision on February 27, 2014, Case 2011du17745 | |||||
| * Plaintiff, Appellee: A
* Defendant: Chairman of the National Labor Relations Commission Intervening * Defendant, Appellant: B Corporation 1. Facts a. The intervening defendant (hereafter 'participant') had entered into an employment contract with the plaintiff, stipulating that if the final evaluation score at the end of the contract met a certain criterion, the contract would be extended. Indeed, following an assessment of work performance, the plaintiff renewed the contract with the participant after achieving a score sufficient for re-contracting. b. At the time of the final employment contract signed on September 29,2008, the participant's 'Regulations for Professional Staff' specified that if the final evaluation score was 75 or above, the contract would be extended. The regulations abolished the total usage limit for professional staff and stated that contracts should be made annually but considered continuously extended annually unless special circumstances arose requiring otherwise. c. Subsequent amendments to the 'Regulations for Professional Staff' scaled back some of the protections originally strengthening the security of professional employees' status. However, these amended regulations did not apply to the employment contract in question between the plaintiff and the participant. 2. Court Judgment a. Although the implementation of the Fixed-Term Employment Act allows employers to employ fixed-term employees for a period of up to two years, after which these employees are considered indefinite-term employees, the primary legislative intent of this law is to prevent the misuse of fixed-term employment contracts and to secure the status of employees. Therefore, it is not reasonable to disregard or limit the previously established legitimate expectations of renewal for fixed-term employees merely due to the enforcement of the law, unless there are special circumstances. b. It was stipulated that a final evaluation would be conducted at the end of the contract, and upon achieving a score sufficient for re-contracting following an assessment of work performance, the contract would be renewed. Additionally, the "Regulations for Professional Staff" specified that if the final evaluation score was 75 or above, the contract would be extended. These regulations also abolished the total employment limit for professional staff and stated that while contracts should be made annually, if employment exceeded one year, the contracts were to be considered continuously extended annually unless special reasons arose requiring otherwise. Considering these points, a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized. Therefore, refusing to renew the employment contract with the plaintiff (a fixed-term employee) to avoid transitioning them to an indefinite-term employee, as required by Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Fixed-Term Employment Act, is without reasonable grounds and constitutes unjust dismissal. |
|||||
| Download : 대법 2011두17745.pdf | |||||
|
<<
< 1 >
>>
|
Table of Contents