A Labour Law For All: the debate on the future of labour law in South Korea
In South Korea, the call for « a labour law for all » is part of a context marked by two facts: on the one hand, the increase in underemployment (due to the transformation of employees into so-called self-employed workers, but also of self-employed workers into dependent workers); on the other hand,...
Kaydedildi:
| Yayımlandı: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/rdctss, |
|---|---|
| Asıl Yazarlar: | , |
| Materyal Türü: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Dil: | Anglais |
| Baskı/Yayın Bilgisi: |
Revue de droit comparé du travail et de la sécurité sociale
2024
|
| Konular: | |
| Online Erişim: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Özet: | In South Korea, the call for « a labour law for all » is part of a context marked by two facts: on the one hand, the increase in underemployment (due to the transformation of employees into so-called self-employed workers, but also of self-employed workers into dependent workers); on the other hand, the organization and demands of self-employed workers. As for the normative context, it is also marked by two elements: 1. The debate on the qualification of employee in Korean labour law: while jurisprudence still considers the employee as a party to an employment contract defined by a subordinate relationship, in practice, the distinction is increasingly blurred. This is the case, for example, with digital platform workers. This is why there is an argument in favor of extending the notion of subordination to economic dependence. 2. Legislative reforms: the 2007 revision of the Workmen’s Compensation Insurance Act introduced a new legal category, that of « persons with a particular activity », i.e. economically dependent self-employed workers. In 2019, the Occupational Safety and Health Act was amended to include economically dependent self-employed workers, digital platform deliverers and franchisees within its scope. In 2021, the Unemployment Insurance Act was amended to introduce the notion of « worker-labour provider », thereby broadening its scope. Finally, the 2022 amendment to the WCIA replaced the notion of « persons with a particular activity » with the notion of « worker-labour provider », following the example of the UIA. In addition, the crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic brought a new element. Whereas the controversy over the extension of the scope of labour law had shown no signs of evolving, the beginnings of a legislative resolution are now appearing. The slogan “Unemployment insurance law for all” was thus launched by the government when certain self-employed workers were included in the scope of unemployment insurance, to compensate for the loss of income of self-employed workers unable to run their businesses as a result of government policies. So the question naturally arose: « Why not a labour law for all? ». |
|---|