• Korean Journal of Labor Studies
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.309-346
• /
• 2008

이 논문에서는 호주에서 한국계 이주자가 다수 취업하고 있는 건설산업의 타일직종의 사례를 중심으로 한국계 이주노동자의 노동실태를 밝힌다. 건설현장의 사례조사를 통해 중층적 하청구조의 말단에 편성된 타일노동조직인 노무재하청업체의 작업방식 및 생산성관리, 숙련구분 및 임금결정, 임금수준 등 기타 노동조건을 구체적으로 규명한다. 그리고 이를 호주의 노사관계에서 제도화된 자영청부방식 및 자영청부공의 노동조건 등과 비교한다. 사례조사는 2006년도에 시드니지역 상업용 건축부문의 타일시공현장 두 곳을 대상으로 이뤄졌다. 두 곳의 건축현장 모두 노조가 활동하는 현장임에도 불구하고 한국계 이주 타일노동자는 공식적인 노사관계제도가 적용되지 않는 무협약상태에 있다. 건설산업의 최저 노동조건이라고 할 수 있는 전국재정 마저도 적용되고 있지 않다. 그들이 공식적인 노사관계제도의 적용으로부터 배제된 근본적인 이유는 타일회사로부터 타일시공을 다시 하수급하는 한국계의 노무재하청업체(오야까따)에 고용되어 있기 때문이다. 타일회사나 빌더는 1990년대 후반부터 다수 유입되기 시작한 한국계 타일공을 이와 같은 노무 재하청방식으로 사용하고 있는 것이다. 건설노조는 확대되는 노무재하청에 대해 한국계 타일노동자를 대상으로 한 여권조사, 임시고용비자 및 타일청부면허 취득 캠페인 등의 활동을 통해 불법취업자의 사용을 금지하는 한편 한국의 타일기능공을 자영타일공으로 전환시켜 노사관계 질서를 세우려 하였다. 그러나 이러한 노조의 활동에도 불구하고 기업협약에 의해서 명문으로 금지되고 있는 노무재하청의 관행이 전혀 개선되지 않고 있다. 노무재하청 관행에 대한 건설노조 정책의 가장 곤란한 문제점은 노무재하청을 행하는 당사자인 재하청업자를 한국계 타일노동자 조합조직의 중심으로 하고 있으며, 또 하지 않을 수 없는 점에 있음을 양국 간의 숙련구분 및 임금제도 비교분석을 통해 밝혔다.

• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.31 no.5
• /
• pp.45-56
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to understand the architectural changes that occurred in the main space of Deoksugung Palace based on the Deoksugung Wonan. In the 1910s, constructions in the Deokhongjeon area and Hamnyeongjeon area caused a change in the main space of Deoksugung Palace, which is similar to the change in the central space of Changdeokgung Palace. In both palaces, the space composition, architectural structure, construction equipment, and architectural design of the palace were changed due to the changed architectural organization and construction system.

• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.15 no.5
• /
• pp.19-39
• /
• 2006

This study deals with construction contract bid-rigging by Japanese contractors who monopolized the construction market of the Korean Peninsula during the Japanese colonial rule, and investigates the abuses of the contract bid-rigging. First of all, construction contract bid-rigging in Korea was triggered by Japanese construction contractors and contract brokers, who had savored the benefits of bidrigging in Japan and had repeated the bid-rigging in Korea since 1903. Second, the agency played a significant role to mediate construction contractors, and existed throughout the Japanese colonial rule on the Korean Peninsula with changing their names. Most of them were engaged in major contract bid-rigging scandals. Among them was Construction Association of Korea, which existed for over 13 years. The agencies had took part in governmental services since the mid-1930s when Japan exploited Korean people during wartime, and focused on sweating human resources for the constructions. Third, one of the biggest construction bid-rigging scandals during the Japanese colonial rule was "the 1st and 2nd scandal on Daegu construction contract bid-rigging." Indeed, the second scandal paved the way for the serial scandals: "Kyeongseong construction contract bid-rigging scandal", "Busan construction contract bid-rigging scandal", and other cases throughout the nation. Fourth, along with the contract bid-rigging cases related to the Japanese Government-General of Korea and local authorities, bid-riggings firmly took rooted in local governments' farmland reclamation projects in the 1920s and the poor relief services in the 1930s. The "bid-rigging charges" forced contractors to compensate their losses with exploiting material costs and labor costs, generating serious problems. The construction contract bid-rigging enabled Japan to monopolize the construction industry and to sweat farmers on the Korean Peninsula. Against this backdrop, contract bid-rigging by Japanese construction contractors during the its colonization made Korean contractors ruled out, and helped Japanese monopolize the industry. A large amount of bid-rigging charges drove Japanese contractors to do fraudulent work with cheap materials and to exploit Korean labor force.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.3-14
• /
• 2018

The system to appraise the execution capabilities of construction companies had been began as the Construction Contract Restriction System in 1958, was changed as the Construction Subcontract Restriction System in 1961, and finally has been operated as the Appraisal and Public Announcement of Execution Capacity (APAEC) from 1996. The APAEC system has been utilized as a firm and unique tool for assessing the execution capacities of construction companies despite many problems and continuous system changes. In spite of numerous studies to improve the APAEC system, however, efforts to analyze the system from the empirical point of view were insufficient. In this study, we analyze the status of APAEC system through analyzing correlations among assessment results of the APAEC, earned values of construction works, construction management performance indexes, and macroeconomic indexes for the past 10 years from 2007 to 2016. As a result of the analysis, it was found that Appraisal Value of Execution Capacity (AVEC) is excessively inflated in engineering and landscaping areas compared to Earned Value of Construction Work (EVCW) and the correlations between the AVECs and EVECs are not high in the areas of engineering, industrial equipment, and landscaping. In addition, technical appraisal values are excessively inflated in engineering and landscaping areas and correlations between AVEC and its components are high in the areas of engineering & building, industrial equipment, and large companies, but low in the areas of engineering, building, landscaping, and small and medium companies. Finally, the concentration of the AVEC is intensifying more and more and the concentration deteriorates construction management performance indexes and macroeconomic indexes. If we continuously improve the APAEC system based on the implications derived in this study, the APAEC system will be able to maintain it's position of a firm and unique means to access the execution capacities of construction companies.