» Korean Federation of Trade Unions (KFTU) members hold a demonstration against the government plan to impose a single channel of trade union representation while encouraging multiple unions in a single workplace, Nov. 28.

Members of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) and Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU) held a joint demonstration against the Lee government plan on labor issues in front of the Government Complex Building in Gwacheon City in Gyeonggi Province, Nov.29. This is the first joint demonstration between the two major umbrella unions in three years. The two major issues on their combined agenda includes the government’s imposition of a single channel of trade union representation during the bargaining process while encouraging multiple unions in a single workplace as of 2010, and its ban on payment to full time union officials.

The Hankyoreh will be examining these two issues closely. To begin, we will be discussing the new employee representation system being proposed by the Lee administration.

The Labor Ministry is showing a firm stance on introducing a new employee representation system that presupposes that the multiple union system will go into effect next year. Its plan prioritizes a single channel of trade union representation. If unions are unable to autonomously determine a single channel of representation, the Labor Ministry will recognize majority representation and grant the union with the majority the right to bargain. If there is no majority union, majority representation, it will recognize a collective bargaining team based on either a proportional representation of unions in the workplace or secured by election. Considering that the current law on trade unions and labor relations does not permit multiple unions, it appears the second stage or recognizing only majority unions will be in place through the end of this year, meaning that minority union members’ situation could worsen without representation.

Observers within and outside the labor world are expressing concern about possible side effects from the Lee administration plan. To begin with, minority unions appear likely to be reduced to powerlessness. Kim Hye-jin, head of Solidarity for the Abolishment of Labor Instability, said, “If the plan for pushing a compulsory single channel of trade union representation is implemented during the bargaining process, companies will begin to focus their welfare improvement measures on full-time workers or major job classes.” Kim added, “There will not be much of a chance that companies or majority unions will do what is necessary to care of minority unions, including those comprised of irregular workers.”

Analyst are also saying there is also a possibility that certain trade and irregular worker unions that have been formerly recognized and able to participate in the bargaining process will lose their bargaining rights. Currently within the current one-workplace, one-union system, there is judicial precedent that recognizes multiple unions in the same workplace when the targets or labor tactics are different. There also exists a roundabout route for bargaining even if there is already in existing union in the same workplace that involves directly joining up with an industry union. According to Labor Ministry data, although the current system prohibiting multiple unions, “multiple bargaining” has taken place at some 107 workplaces, including Korean Air, KORAIL, Ezentech and Donghee Auto. The 241 unions bargaining under this category account for around 4.9 percent of all unions and include some 166,000 members or 10 percent of all union members. If compelled to consolidate their channels of negotiation, minority unions that have engaged in the bargaining process to date will have to entrust their bargaining rights to majority unions, which may likely lead to diminished representation of their interests.

Labor experts are predicting that the new bargaining procedures will lead to both an increase in company-based union practices and regressive labor practices as represented by low union membership rates in the 10 to 20 percent range. Kim Yu-seon, director of the Korean Labour and Society Institute, says, “Labor movements that have been able to establish themselves on an industry basis will now be bound to operate on a company basis.”

A still bigger problem that is being pointed out is that making a single channel of trade union representation compulsory may violate the workers’ rights of association and collective bargaining guaranteed by the Constitution. Lee Sang-ho, a senior researcher at the Korean Metal Workers Union policy research institute, says that the problem is “less the negotiation channel unification itself than its being made mandatory.” Lee adds, “Sometimes unification comes about organically among unions in an attempt to improve their bargaining ability, but when the government compels them to do so, it raises questions about unconstitutionality.”　

The National Assembly Research Service also said Tuesday that because forcing a single channel of trade union representation threatens to limit basic rights, related matters must be decided through legislation in the National Assembly.

The labor world plans to respond with legal action, including a possible Constitutional appeal if the administration is able to force through these changes that only recognizes a single channel of trade union representation. Observers are predicting that if this happens and dispute actions by minority unions become illegal as a result, the debate over constitutionality may also be accompanied by chaos in the workplace.　

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