메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
노동법이론실무학회 노동법포럼 노동법포럼 제5호
발행연도
2010.10
수록면
43 - 66 (24page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act was amended on January 1, 2010, principally for the purpose of permitting workers to build a second trade union in an enterprise or a workplace, and establishing the procedure of Single Bargaining Channel in case of plural unions' existence in the same enterprise or workplace. But these new provisions will enter into force on July 1, 2011, because social partners could have enough time to adapt themselves to new circumstances of Multi-unionism. However, concerning the procedure of Single Bargaining Channel, some comments criticise the amendment and insist that the relative provisions are not appropriate to our legal system, especially to the constitutional guarantee of collective bargaining right. But I don't agree with these opinions, and I'd like to evaluate these provisions from the viewpoint of the theory of collective agreement and propose a legislative opinion to supplement some defects of the amended Act. In conclusion, I could not find a grave fault in these new provisions, except some trivial defects as follows: - In case "Autonomous Bargaining Representative Body" or "Joint Bargaining Representative Team" conduct bargaining with the employer, a question can be brought out  i. e. 'Could the Body or the Team be the partner of the collective agreement concerned?' Because the Body or the Team itself is not a trade union but a ad. hoc. group, built for collective bargaining, it could be not permanently liable to results, when the union members violates the collective agreement. On the contrary, if each trade union of the Body or of the Team becomes the subject of the agreement, it will verify its own union members' observation of the agreement, and can be responsible to the results occurred by them. - Concerning the "scope of workers bound by collective agreement", no provision is found in the revised Act, so that we have some questions about it. For example, When the "Joint Ba rga in ing Representative Team" concludes a collective agreement with the employer, the members of the trade union, which could not participate in the team because of having less than 10/100 of those of all unions, can not be applied to the agreement under Art 29-2 paragraph 4. This result is neither fair to the union members nor correspond to the principle of Single Bargaining Channel. I think, we need an explicit provision about the scope of workers bound by the collective agreement. And l hope, under such a provision, not only union members but also non-organised workers of the same bargaining unit will be covered by the collective agreement.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2019-360-001215274