MOEL Interpretation

Labor Union Act

Unfair Labor Practice


  •  
     Search
155 Records
155.The workplace in question is a taxi company where 80% of employees are at or past retirement age. The collective agreement stipulates that the retirement age is the last day of the month in which an employee turns 60, based on their date of birth. * By established practice, employees reaching retirement age continue working under renewed fixed-term or reemployment contracts. In this case, the employer required only the union president, among those reaching retirement age, to sign a new fixed-term employment contract and subsequently issued a notice of contract termination based on that contract. The inquiry is whether this action constitutes an unfair labor practice.
154.A labor union has posted banners in various locations within the workplace without the employer’s approval. These banners either promote the union or contain messages defaming the company. The employer requested the union to remove the banners, citing infringement of the employer’s facility management rights. However, the union refused and expanded the locations of banner installation. The inquiry is whether it constitutes an unfair labor practice for the employer, who holds the facility management rights, to unilaterally remove the banners posted without consent and return them to the union.
153.This inquiry concerns the union activities of a labor union president whose union spans multiple provinces. The president is conducting union activities at a business site located in a different region from their primary place of employment. * Is it permissible for the union president to take personal leave and access another regional workplace before a collective agreement is concluded, due to the absence of a labor-time exemption agreement? If so, what is the legal basis? * What are the appropriate methods and legal grounds for posting union notices at the two different workplaces? * Does the employer’s action of reassigning the union president from field duties to office work solely due to their union status, instructing supervisors to monitor and report on their movements, and restricting the use of company equipment for union activities outside of work hours constitute an unfair labor practice? * What are the permissible scopes of lawful union activities prior to the conclusion of a collective agreement?
152.A company has established an enterprise-level labor union that includes all employees, including those rehired as contract workers after reaching retirement age. However, the company appears to be deliberately attempting to prevent contract workers from joining the union by hiring them under six-month contracts and deciding on renewals based on whether they have joined the union. Is this practice in violation of the law?
151.Facts: * The union representative was dismissed and subsequently filed for relief for unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices with the Labor Relations Commission and also initiated a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalid dismissal. * In the Central Labor Relations Commission’s reexamination decision, unfair dismissal was acknowledged, but the unfair labor practice claim was dismissed. Both parties filed lawsuits with the administrative court, which are currently pending. Additionally, the dismissal lawsuit was decided by the High Court as a justified dismissal, and the case is now pending before the Supreme Court. Under these circumstances, is the employer justified in refusing to bargain with the dismissed individual who was elected as the next union representative in a subsequent election?
150.Facts: * The branch representative of the △△ Branch of the National ○○ Union was dismissed for illegal strikes and other reasons. The individual filed for relief for unfair dismissal and unfair labor practice, and in the Central Labor Relations Commission’s reexamination, unfair dismissal was upheld while the unfair labor practice claim was dismissed. The employer, dissatisfied with the ruling, did not reinstate the individual and instead filed an administrative lawsuit, which is still pending. * Subsequently, the dismissed branch head ran in the representative election of the △△ Branch (organized at the company) and was re-elected. * The National ○○ Union appointed the dismissed branch head as one of the bargaining representatives and requested collective bargaining. The employer rejected the request, demanding the exclusion of the dismissed individual, and refused to bargain. The union claims this constitutes an unfair labor practice. Is it legitimate for an employer to refuse to bargain and demand the exclusion or replacement of a bargaining representative who has been dismissed from the relevant workplace?
149.Facts: * During the process of selecting bargaining representatives for collective bargaining between the company and its enterprise-based labor union (affiliated with a higher-level federated organization), the union delegated its bargaining authority to union executives of competing companies in the same industry. Among the four union-side bargaining representatives, three were executives of unions from three separate competing companies. * The enterprise-based union did not explicitly delegate bargaining authority to its affiliated higher-level organization. Is it permissible for an enterprise-based union to delegate bargaining authority to union executives of other competing companies without express delegation to its higher-level organization? Given the nature of the industry where confidentiality and trade secrets are important, if three of the four union-side representatives are executives of unions at competing companies and the company delays bargaining by requesting the replacement of such representatives due to concerns about disclosing confidential business information, would this constitute an unfair labor practice?
148.Facts: * The company operates 152 taxis with 260 employees. As of July 1, 2011, 259 employees were members of the Korea Taxi Industry Union, and one employee had established a separate local union (A Region ○○ Taxi Union) following a court ruling on August 20, 2009. As a result, the company became a workplace with multiple unions. * As the existing wage agreement expired on January 31, 2012, the minority union (A Region ○○ Taxi Union) made an individual bargaining request on November 28, 2011, based on the transitional provisions of Article 6 of the Addenda to the amended Trade Union Act. * The company scheduled a meeting for bargaining representatives on December 19, 2011, and requested the union to submit a list of its members as of November 15, 2011, by December 16. The union refused. The company repeated the request on December 17, but the union continued to refuse. The company then notified the union that the introductory meeting would be postponed until the union’s membership could be confirmed. In this situation, if the union refuses to confirm its membership and the employer delays bargaining until confirmation, does such refusal constitute an unfair labor practice?
147.Facts: ▶ Due to the nature of the construction industry, members of the ○○ Regional Construction Union tend to have relatively short employment periods (from 1 week to 3 months), frequently alternating between employment and unemployment. ▶ As a result, it is common for union members to be employed by different employers each time they find work, with frequent changes in their employer. In such conditions: * Is it justifiable for an employer to require confirmation of union membership as a precondition for agreeing to collective bargaining? * Is it justifiable for an employer to refuse to continue collective bargaining on the grounds that the union members have resigned during the bargaining process?
146.Facts: ▶ The company is currently conducting wage negotiations with the union following the expiration of the wage agreement validity period. The company and the union signed a “Basic Agreement on Wage Negotiation Principles” that covers wage increase rates and institutional reforms. ▶ However, the union’s demands submitted during the wage negotiations also include many items unrelated to the agreement and unrelated to wages—such as retirement consolation payments and the creation of employment stabilization funds—which are matters to be discussed in a collective agreement. Whether the employer is obligated to respond to such demands unrelated to wages and not included in the previously signed “Basic Agreement on Wage Negotiation Principles,” and whether refusal to do so constitutes an unfair labor practice.
145.The collective agreement concluded between labor and management stipulates that “collective bargaining and wage negotiations between the △△ Regional Saemaul Geumgo and the labor union shall be conducted through joint bargaining.” Nevertheless, some employers belonging to the △△ Regional Saemaul Geumgo claim that this method does not suit their company’s circumstances and are refusing joint bargaining, insisting on individual bargaining only. Whether such a demand is justifiable.
144.Facts ▶ The △△ Industry Employers’ Council and the National △△ Industry Union concluded a collective agreement that stipulates, “△△ industry employers shall join the △△ Industry Employers’ Council and actively participate in central bargaining with the union.” The agreement also includes an automatic renewal clause that provides for continued validity until a renewed agreement is concluded upon expiration. ▶ The △△ Industry Employers’ Council has customarily conducted bargaining with the union in stages—central industrial-level bargaining, followed by regional-level group bargaining, and then site-specific diagonal bargaining—based on bargaining and agreement authority delegated by its member companies. Company A, a member of the employers’ council, voluntarily withdrew from the council and declared it would not participate in central or regional bargaining, agreeing only to site-level diagonal bargaining. The union, however, asserts that despite the withdrawal, the collective agreement remains valid due to the automatic renewal clause and insists that Company A is still obligated to participate in central and regional bargaining. In this case, does Company A’s refusal to engage in central and regional bargaining, as claimed by the union, constitute an unfair labor practice?
143.Facts ▶ The company is undergoing a single bargaining channel unification process related to a wage agreement. Among the four unions participating in the bargaining, three unions formed a coalition and notified the employer that they constitute the majority of the bargaining unions, and that the “three union presidents” are to act as the bargaining representatives. ▶ It is common practice that when a majority union is formed through a coalition, a single representative is designated and notified to the employer. However, in this case, the union designated three joint representatives and notified the employer that the wage and collective agreements would only be valid if all three jointly sign and seal them. Whether the restriction that the agreements are only valid when signed and sealed by all three joint representatives violates the 「Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act」, and whether the employer’s refusal to bargain on the grounds of demanding the designation of a single representative constitutes an unfair labor practice.
142.Facts ▶ The company is a multi-union workplace (hereinafter referred to as Union 1 and Union 2). Since the bargaining representative union could not be designated through a voluntary single bargaining channel unification procedure, Union 1 was designated as the majority bargaining representative union in accordance with Article 29-2(3) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act. ▶ Union 2 filed an objection with the Regional Labor Relations Commission, which confirmed Union 1 as the majority bargaining representative union. However, Union 2 disagreed and filed for reexamination with the Central Labor Relations Commission. In the event the decisions of the Regional and Central Labor Relations Commissions differ, whether the “decision not suspended by an administrative lawsuit” in Article 70(2) of the Act refers to the Regional Commission’s decision or the Central Commission’s decision; and whether, despite Article 70(2), the employer may refuse to engage in collective bargaining on the grounds that the bargaining representative union has not been finalized until the administrative court decision becomes final.
141.If the union bylaws stipulate that “the representative must obtain prior approval from the general assembly (or delegates’ council) when concluding a collective agreement,” would it constitute an unfair labor practice if the employer refuses to bargain temporarily, requesting confirmation of the union representative’s authority to conclude the agreement?
140.The labor union demands group bargaining outside the workplace, whereas the employer prefers individual bargaining within the company premises. In such a situation where collective bargaining is delayed due to disagreements between the labor and management over the method of bargaining, the bargaining location, and the delegation of bargaining authority, does this constitute an unfair labor practice by the employer?
139.Following the breakdown of wage negotiations, the labor union of △△ Company has occupied the factory facilities, citing the employer’s insincere and negligent attitude toward wage negotiations. The union has expelled non-union workers, managerial staff, and security personnel from the premises and blocked the main gate. In this situation, does the employer’s refusal to engage in further negotiations constitute an unfair labor practice?
138.If a company-based union changes its organizational form into a branch or chapter of an industrial union and submits a proposal to amend the collective bargaining agreement, does the employer’s refusal to bargain on the grounds that the current agreement is still valid constitute an unfair labor practice?
137.Facts ▶ Status of Introduction of the Retirement Pension Plan at Korea ○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") * 2011.5.2.–5.3.: At the time, Union A (an industrial union), which was the sole union, conducted a vote among its members regarding the introduction of the retirement pension plan, and it was rejected (voter turnout 64%, approval rate 42%) * 2011.5.15.: The Company introduced the retirement pension plan for its managerial employees (grades 1 to 3) through individual consent * 2011.7–8: Establishment of enterprise unions B and C * 2011.12.22.: The Company agreed to introduce the retirement pension plan during wage negotiations with Union B (agreement details: the plan would be introduced only for members of Union B who wished to participate) ※ The Company also concluded a separate wage agreement with Union A on 2011.12.21., but there was no discussion on the retirement pension plan * 2012.1.4.: The Company and Union B agreed on January 15, 2012, as the implementation date for the retirement pension plan Given that the introduction of the retirement pension plan was rejected by Union A in the May 2011 vote and that the Company and Union B agreed to limit the scope of implementation, would it not be deemed union discrimination or an unfair labor practice if the Company restricts the implementation of the plan to members of Union B only? * Alternatively, since Union B is currently the majority union and its representative agreed to the introduction of the retirement pension plan, should the plan be applied equally to members of other unions and non-union employees regardless of the “limited to Union B members” clause agreed upon between the Company and Union B? (Union A argues that since the representative of the majority union, Union B, signed the agreement, participation in the retirement pension plan should be allowed regardless of union affiliation, while the Company contends that because the vote in Union A failed, consent from the representative of Union A is necessary to introduce the retirement pension plan for its members)
136.Due to severe financial difficulties, our company has been in a position to reduce the workforce and has repeatedly instructed that substitute work should not be performed. However, the union issued a directive instructing members to forcibly engage in substitute work based on the collective agreement. As a result, the company was compelled to issue a work instruction stating that substitute work without the department head’s directive would not be recognized. ※ The collective agreement stipulates that in cases where a union member is absent due to vacation or early leave, another union member may perform substitute work in the form of overtime work. Given this, does the company’s instruction prohibiting overtime work constitute an unfair labor practice?
<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > >>


For further questions, please
call (+82) 2-539-0098 or email bongsoo@k-labor.com