• Journal of Labour Economics
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.83-104
• /
• 2005

The Korean system of labor adjudication on the cases of unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices has been criticized by labor and management in spite of the strong point that the Labor Relations Commission processes the cases quickly. This paper empirically investigates the effectiveness of labor adjudication dealt by the Labor Relations Commission with economic approach. It shows that the grievences of labor and management on the existing labor adjudication system have come from the inadequate processes of labor adjudication rather than the favorable or unfavorable ruling. It also shows that a major deterrent to make an effective labor adjudication system has been not the problems of the selfish attitude and expectation of labor and management but the improper attitude and quality of the member and staff of the Labor Relations Commission.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.337-366
• /
• 2011

In this article, I intend to analyze the definition of an employee under the Trade Union Act in Japan. Recently, the Supreme Court of Japan held that not only opera singer but also customer engineer is an employee under the Act. Conclusions are as follows:First, it is noteworthy that the Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle of all circumstances established by CBC case. The case focused on deciding that who is an employee under the Act. Notwithstanding this holding of the Supreme Court, district courts and courts of appeals, in deciding this kind of question, have emphasized especially on the side of a legal right and obligation on a contract between an employer and a potential employee. Therefore an independent contractor has not been generally recognized as an employee under the Act. However, even though he or she was, as an independent contractor in name, offering its work to his or her putative employer, the Supreme Court applied the principle of all circumstances to both cases and held in favor on the workers on April, in 2011. Second, the Supreme Court failed to make a general legal principle for deciding that who is an employee under the Act. According to the above holdings of the Supreme Court, nobody can anticipate wether he or she is an employee or not in a concrete case. Finally, the Supreme Court did not also make its opinion clearly about the relations between an employee of the Section 3 of the Act and an employee whom an employer employs under the Section 7(2) of the Act. In conclusion, it can be said that the Supreme Court has narrowly and strictly interpreted an employee of the Section 3. That is to say, only where an employee is recognized as an employee of the Section 7(2), the employee will be also an employee of the Section 3. In Japan, however, the majority interprets that an employee by the Section 3 should be distinguished from the employee whom an employer employs by the Section 7(2). Consequently, according to the majority opinions, unemployed persons, students and citizens will be also included in the definition of an employee by the Section 3.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.9 no.12
• /
• pp.836-842
• /
• 2009

On April 14, 2008, National Human Rights Commission of Korea's recommendation led to severe argument that hiring qualification of religious school. it shall not be an unlawful employment practice for a school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of learning to hire and employ employees of a particular religion if such organizations is, in whole or in substantial part, owned, supported, controlled, or managed by a particular religion or by a particular religious corporation, association, or society, or if the curriculum of such organizations is directed toward the propagation of a particular religion. An employer is a "religious organization" entitled to the exemption. So If the employer is a school, its history and mission, the religion of the faculty and students, and the religious focus of the curriculum must be examined. Consequently it is possible for religious educational institution to reject specific religionist.