hankyoreh

which tried to pass a revision to the Irregular Workers’ Law. The demonstration was held in front of the National Assembly on July 3.

“There are currently 16 million workers. The number of workers who belong to the two major labor federations amounts to a mere 10 percent. Thus, there have even been doubts presented about whether these two federations can be partners in social consensus.”

These remarks came from spokesperson Yoon Sang-hyun during a briefing on the results of a meeting of major party officials in the Grand National Party presided over by the party’s floor leader Ahn Sang-soo on Friday.

Additionally, the GNP repeatedly pressured the Democratic Party to accept a plan the GNP agreed upon with the Liberty Forward Party and the Pro-Park Geun-hye Alliance to postpone implementation of the Irregular Worker Act for another year and six months. It also proposed holding six-party talks that would include floor leaders from the ruling party and two opposition parties and the policy committee chair, and establishing a special committee in connection with the issue in the National Assembly on the precondition of delayed implementation of the Irregular Worker Act.

This represents a recent change in approach from the previous one of attempting to resolve issues through five-person meetings with representatives of the Federation of Korean Trade Unions and Korean Confederation of Trade Unions and Environment and Labor Committee officials from the ruling party and two opposition parties. It can also be interpreted as an expression of disappointment with the “social dialogue” in which the two federations participated. But with this attempt to push forward discussions centering on politicians, with the labor groups in question excluded, controversy appears inevitable.

First, the special nature of the issue, namely that social compromise is essential from the labor and management parties involved, is being ignored. One characteristic of the irregular worker issue is that a large number of workers and companies must change their behavior and culture, and this cannot be compelled by law alone.

“Even if they try for a breakthrough centered on politicians without social consensus, the conflict will continue, ” said Choi Young-ki, senior researcher at the Gyeonggi Research Institute and one-time director of the Korea Labor Institute, indicating that there is concern about increased social costs resulting from increased conflict.

The questioning of the qualifications of those involved, citing the low membership of the two labor federations, is also generating controversy. Woo Moon-sook, director of the KCTU’s external cooperation department, said that the GNP officials “have closed their eyes to the reality in which the two labor federations have participated on behalf of all workers in various government-related bodies, including the National Labor Relations Commission and Minimum Wage Commission.”

Second, observers are commenting that because a process of obtaining labor-management-government compromise was carried out during the making of the currently operating law in 2006, dialogue among the parties involved is necessary even if this law is revised. Labor, management and government went through a total of 15 rounds of negotiations supervised by then Uri Party fifth policy coordination committee chair Lee Mok-hee, with the general secretaries of the KCTU and FKTU, the vice-chairs of the Korean Employer Federation and Korea Chamber of Commerce & Industry, and the labor minister in attendance.

“There is no effect if you pursue things without including the labor world, so we sought consensus even though it was difficult,” said Lee.

Third, observers are expressing concern that the spirit and tradition of social dialogue established in South Korean society since the Kim Young-sam administration might be crashing down. In 1996, under the leadership of then Cheong Wa Dae senior secretary for policy planning Park Se-il, labor, management and the government formed the Economic and Social Development Commission and began putting their heads together to discuss amending the Labor Relations Act. After that, a tradition of dialogue and compromise was established, including the initiation of the ESDC during the 1998 IMF crisis. But after the ESDC became merely a nominal body when the Lee Myung-bak administration took office, there is the danger that the last spark of social dialogue might be extinguished this time around.

“It is not something desirable, in that the infrastructure for finding agreement and mediating conflict is falling apart,” said Choi Young-ki.

As a result, voices urging a shift in thinking are emerging not only from the opposition parties but also from some segments of the ruling party. DP Chairman Chung Sye-kyun said Thursday that the GNP “proposed six-party talks, but the right thing would be for this issue to ultimately go back to labor, management and the government.” Chung added that he would actively participate in discussions “if labor, management and the government are engaged properly, and if the opposition parties can participate properly.”

Kim Sung-tae, a GNP lawmaker and former FKTU general secretary, said in a phone conversation with the Hankyoreh on Friday that “the most desirable way would be to set a clear agenda aimed at supplementation to protect irregular workers, place responsibility on the Labor Minister, and then enter discussions on amending the law with participation from labor, management and the government.”

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]