• Korean Journal of Labor Studies
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.107-156
• /
• 2018

This article examines the history of the in - house subcontracting and the stabilization of labor - management relations in the steel industry in Japan. The ratio of in-house subcontract workers among steel workers has increased steadily until the mid-2000s, and about 70% in case of the largest company. In-house subcontracting was used as a strategy of the company to increase the quantity flexibility of employment and to save labor costs. The in-house subcontracting company needed company-specialized skills, and the internal labor market was formed because the rate of full-time workers was high and the turnover rate was low. The in-house subcontractor introduced long-term business relationship with the steel factory by introducing the equipment and materials necessary for the performance of the work, and the factory implemented the productivity improvement policy of the in-house subcontractor, and the win-win relationship between the factory and in-house subcontractor was developed. The trade union did not oppose the idea that the expansion of in-house subcontracting contributed to corporate profits, the stability of employment of the members and maintenance of their working conditions. Since 2000, the steel factory has pursued the transformation of in - house subcontractors into subsidiaries, which has been supported by capital relations. By the way, since the mid-2000s, there has been an increase in the number of regular workers' employment. The major factors are as follows: more strengthened compliance with laws and regulations, the higher quality request of customers, stricter keeping of deadlines, and problem in recruiting of workers at in-house subcontract companies. The wage gap between the factory and in - house subcontracting was less at company B than at company S, and the wage level of in - house subcontracting was about 90% of the factory at company B. The relatively small gap at company B seems to be due to the union's movement of narrowing the gap, low market dominance and unfavorable labor market. The internal labor market has been formed in the in-house subcontracting, and the wage gap is not large, and the possibility of labor disputes is low. Industrial relations are stable in the in-house subcontract company as well as the factory. The stabilization of labor-management relations in the steel industry in Korea is required to reduce the wage gap between the factory and in-house subcontract enterprises by raising productivity and expanding the internal labor market at in-house subcontract enterprises.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.241-281
• /
• 2013

First and foremost, a discussion concerning government structure has to be done in connection with the state form and the governmental form. For practical reasons, there is a need to balance the principle of legality and its exceptions under the Government Organization Act. To ensure the flexibility of government structure with respect to the principle of legality, the National Assembly should accept the government structure requested by the newly elected government. This mitigates the rigidity of the principle of the legality within the government organizations. However, excessive changes by each government could violate the principle of legality asked by Constitution. In this sense, arbitrary modification with respect to the government structure by the newly elected government is not desirable. The long term stability of the government organization is required in any case. Secondly, general administrative agencies, other than Executive Ministries, should not be established under the direct order of the President without the control of the Prime Minister. A hierarchy of the executive branch (President->Prime Minister-> Executive Ministries) is stipulated in the Constitution. Establishing a hierarchy of President -> executive institution should be considered unconstitutional. Therefore, only the Presidential Secretariat and institutions with special functions can be established in the Presidential Office. Establishing general administrative agencies in the Presidential Office for convenience purposes is against the spirit of the current Constitution. Consequently, only the office of staffs and special agencies can be placed in the presidential office. It is against the spirit of the current Constitution to found administrative agencies under the presidential office for convenience. Thirdly, the office of the Prime Minister should be the backbone of internal affairs. In that sense, the President, as the head of state, should focus on the big picture such as the direction of the State, while the Cabinet headed by the Prime Minister should be responsible for the daily affairs of the State. The cabinet surrounding the Prime Minister must control all the ordinary affairs of the State, while the President, as the head of the State, should focus on the big picture of blueprinting the aim of the State. Lastly, the Office of the Prime Minister and Executive Ministries are the two main bodies of the executive branch. It is important to reduce the confusion caused by repeated changes in the names of Executive Ministries, to restore the traditional names and authorities of these institutions, and to rehabilitate the legitimacy of the State. For the Korean democracy to take its roots, a systematic way of stabilizing a law-governed democratic country is needed. There is also the need not only to reform security and economic agencies, but also to rationally solve the integration of technique and policy, according to the changes of time.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.169-189
• /
• 2006

In 2007, KSLV(Korea Small Launching Vehicle) that we made at Goheung National Space Center is going to launch and promotes of our space exploration systematically and 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' was enter into force. 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' article 3, section 1, as is prescribing "Korean government keeps the space treaties contracted with other countries and international organizations and pursues after peaceful uses of outer space." The representative international treaties are Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Liability Convention (1972) etc. In Liability convention article 2, "A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft in flight. The important content of the art. 2 is the responsible entity is the 'State' not the 'Company'. According by Korean Space Exploration Act art. 14, person who launches space objects according to art. 8 and art. 11 must bear the liability for damages owing to space accidents of the space objects. Could Korean government apply the Products Liability Act which is enter into force from July 1, 2002 to space launching person? And what is the contact type between Korea Aerospace Research Institute(KARl) and Russia manufacturer. Is that a Co-Development contract or Licence Product contract? And there is no exemption clause to waive the Russia manufacturer's liability which we could find it from other similar contract condition. If there is no exemption clause to the Russia manufacturer, could we apply the Korean Products Liability Act to Russia one? The most important legal point is whether we could apply the Korean Products Liability Act to the main component company. According by the art. 17 of the contract between KARl and the company, KARl already apply the Products Liability Act to the main component company. For reference, we need to examine the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, this case is that long distance electricity communication satellite of Western Union Telegraph company possessions fails on track entry. In Western Union's insurance company supplied to Western Union with insurance of $ 105 millions, which has the satellite regard as entirely damage. Five insurance companies -Appalachian insurance company, Commonwealth insurance company, Industrial Indemnity, Mutual Marine Office, Northbrook Excess & Surplus insurance company- went to court against McDonnell Douglases, Morton Thiokol and Hitco company to inquire for fault and strict liability of product. By the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, KARl should waiver the main component's product liability burden. And we could study the possibility of the adapt 'Government Contractor Defense' theory to the main component company.