Call for International Action: Condemn Repression Against South Korean Trade Unions
Korean Confederation of Trade Unions
2nd Fl. Daeyoung Bld., 139 Youngdeungpo-2-ga, Youngdeungpo-ku, Seoul 150-032 KoreaTel.: +82-2-2670-9234 Fax: +82-2-2635-1134 E-mail: inter@kctu.org http://kctu.org
CALL FOR AN INTERNATIONAL DAY OF ACTION: CONDEMN GOVERNMENT REPRESSION AGAINST FUNDAMENTAL TRADE UNION RIGHTS IN SOUTH KOREA
JOIN THE INTERNATIONAL DAY OF ACTION ON NOVEMBER 15TH!
SOLIDARITY WITH SOUTH KOREAN WORKERS! SUPPORT THE KCTU GENERAL STRIKE!
SOUTH KOREAN GOVERNMENT : STOP TRADE UNION REPRESSION!
IMPLEMENT ILO RECOMMENDATIONS! RECOGNIZE IRREGULAR WORKERS' RIGHTS!
REFORM LABOUR LAWS IN LINE WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS, NOT THE PROPOSED 'ROADMAP'!
When South Korea joined the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 1996, there was much hoopla and expectations. To the international community it appeared that South Korea was on the brink of shedding is shameful image of dictatorship that undermined democracy and fundamental trade union rights. At the time, South Korean government committed to “reform existing laws on industrial relations in line with internationally accepted standards, including those concerning basic rights such as freedom of association and collective bargaining.” However, ten years later, South Korea has not even come close. The recent repressive actions of the South Korean government under the Roh Moon Hyun administration clearly shows that South Korea has failed as an economically developed democratic country in ensuring fundamental trade union rights according to international labor standards.
In March of this year, the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) of the ILO announced its recommendations in association to trade union rights violations in South Korea. The recommendations raised serious concerns on the government’s repression against trade unions, specifically the Korean Government Employees Union (KGEU) and the Korean Federation of Construction Industry Trade Unions (KFCITU). However, the government not only has refused to implement these recommendations but more importantly it has chosen to intensify its attacks on the KGEU and the KFCITU, thus, snubbing its “nose” to international labor standards. In addition, the government has failed to ensure the fundamental basic rights of irregular (subcontract, part-time, dispatched, “self-employed”, etc.) workers, which makes up the majority of the work force in South Korea.
Since 2002, the ILO has called on the South Korean government to recognize the KGEU but the government steadfastly refuses to do so, stating that the KGEU is an illegal organization under the existing labor laws. For a number of years, the international community has called on the South Korean government to change these laws as it violates the core ILO conventions. In a flagrant disregard to these international demands, the South Korean government has once again launched a full fledged attack against the KGEU through a serious of actions, the most blatant being the coordinated forced closure of all local KGEU union offices.
On Friday, September 22, the government sent in thousands of riot police across the country to use “any means necessary” to shut down the KGEU union offices. The police identified “any means necessary” as using fire extinguishers, fire-fighting dust, hammers, claw hammers, hammer drills, and power saws. Armed with these weapons, riot police and hired thugs forced inside local union offices, dragging KGEU members and their supporters outside the office, and then finally shutting and sealing the offices like coffins. In the words of a KEGU leader, “more than 100 municipalities nation wide turned into battle fields.” By the end of the day out of a total 251 local union offices, 81 were completely shut down. Many members were injured and as a result some were hospitalised. Some KGEU members and their supporters were arrested and detained. It is quite clear that the government is determined to do everything in its power to systematically destroy the KGEU.
Across the country over 100 trade unionists have been imprisoned just for exercising their three basic fundamental trade union rights---right to organize, the right to strike, and the right to bargain. The KFCITU members comprise the majority of those in jail due to a series of strikes conducted by KFCITU affiliates, specifically the Daegu, Ulsan, and Pohang local unions. Stating that KFCITU members incited violence, caused disturbance of the peace, and coordinated or participated in violent, illegal industrial actions, 49 KFCITU members are still imprisoned. Much more alarming is the fact the government habitually mobilizes thousands of riot police across the country to forcibly break KFCITU actions and strikes. Despite the fact that the union had legal permits that give them the right to conduct demonstration and marches, the police will often bar them going forward or attempt to shut down the actions. At times, the police violence is so extreme that it results in numerous injuries and in the case of Ha Joong Keun, a tragic death. Brother Ha died from injuries he suffered after several riot police repeatedly beat him on the head with their metal shields. To date, government has refused to accept full responsibility for Ha’s death and call for an end to police violence. Instead, the government has alluded that the violent actions of the KFCITU is the reason behind the arrests, injuries, and even death of Ha Joong Keun.
Even though the CFA raised serious concerns about the South Korean government using criminal law to arrest and imprison trade unionists, throughout this summer, the prosecution once again charged KFCITU organizers for using force, bribery, and extortion to sign collective bargaining agreements with construction companies. The union’s only “crime” has been to organize construction site workers, who are one of the most marginalized sectors of South Korean society.
From the recent harsh sentencing---imprisonment from two to three years---against the key leaders of the Pohang local union, it is evident that the South Korean government is using the KFCITU as an example to deter construction workers from joining unions. More importantly, many in the labor movement believe the government’s actions is an attempt to stop irregular workers from organizing, as at least 80% of the work force in the construction industry are irregular workers.
Indeed, in the wake of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, rapid casualization ensued and irregular workers (contract, dispatch, “specially-employed” [self-employed], and part-time workers) have become the majority of the Korean workforce. Yet in such cases where the employment relationship is disguised, the State has failed to uphold existing labor laws, resulting in the preclusion of this whole class of workers from exercising trade union rights fundamental to all workers (freedom to form a trade union, collective bargaining and collective action). In the metal sector, the Labor Ministry itself has ruled that many of the workers victimized by en masse retaliatory dismissals for organizing a union were victimized by employers using the illegal practice of hiring them as dispatch labor disguised as subcontracting, and that the workers should be regularized; yet, at the time of the ICFTU mission, some 700 irregular workers in the metal sector were still struggling for reinstatement after dismissal for having organized a union. For example, the Labor Ministry found that Kiryung Electronics illegally used labor dispatch, but the irregular women workers of Kiryung Electronics are the ones subject to all kinds of physical assault —by thugs privately employed by the employer as well as police violence—fear, imprisonment and intimidation because of their union activities. Further, the president of the union local recently collapsed in the course of a hunger strike during a protest visit to the Labor Ministry; yet, the state intervention in this case has been to imprison the union president, push situations to clashes by mobilizing large forces of riot police and generally shield the employer from obligation to resolve outstanding issues with the union in bargaining. The women workers of the KTX, the high-speed bullet train, have also been subject to such repression of their freedom to organize a union, and here again, we saw state intervention to quickly close in on exercise of fundamental trade union rights.
“September 11 Deal”---Legislative Measures to Undermine Labor Rights
On September 11, the South Korean government announced the “Grand Tripartite Agreement” on the Roadmap for Industrial Relations Reforms. The agreement was concluded in an “Emergency Session” of the tripartite representatives meeting, attended by the Ministry of Labor, the Korean Employer’s Federation, the Korean chamber of Commerce, the Korean Tripartite Commission and the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU). However, one of the tripartite members, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) representing 800,000 members was deliberately excluded from this meeting. It was not even notified about the meeting even though they had been participating in previous meetings.
This bill, referred to as the “9-11 Deal”, falls far short of the original legislative objective of reforming industrial relations and systems in South Korea. The government had publicly stated that the main principles behind their proposal were to “build industrial relations that conform to international standards.” However, the “9-11 Deal is completely contrary to that goal. The main reason being that once again the government has deferred the existence of multiple unions at the enterprise level for another three years. In doing this, the government has in the words of the ICTFU/TUAC/GUFs mission taken a “disturbing step backwards.”(Please see the attached related-report)
In addition, the South Korean government has stated that the new agreement is in line with international standards since it has repealed provisions mandating compulsory arbitration but in reality the government has done the exact opposite, for they have expanded the scope of “essential” public services to include air transport, blood supply, water purification, and steam and hot water supply. Thus, even though compulsory arbitration is repealed, it exists only on paper, as workers in the “essential” public services such as transportation and public health, will be subject to imposition of Emergency Mediation, which includes compulsory arbitration with additional obligations to maintain minimum services as well as the imposition of a replacement workforce. In a nutshell, these workers will be subject to a 3-fold regulation that would effectively cut back on their right to exercise the right to collective actions.
General Strike and International Day of Action
Despite the government repression and the challenges they are facing, the KCTU is determined to proceed forward. The KCTU has developed and plans to implement a national, comprehensive, strategic campaign to mobilize its 800,000 members against the South Korean government’s repressive efforts to undermine fundamental labour rights in South Korea. KCTU members will be organized and mobilized in full force as their right to exist is once again threatened. The KCTU will launch a General Strike on November 15 and in conjunction with this strike, the KCTU calls on the international community to coordinate a series of actions and events to support their struggle. .
WHAT YOU CAN DO
1. Participate in the International Day of Action (November 15, 2006) by conducting a demonstration in front of a South Korean embassy or consulate, coordinating a press conference, or issuing a statement or resolution.
2. Send a protest letter to President Roh Moo Hyun at the Blue House through your local embassy or consulate. And e-mail at president@cwd.go.kr
Copies should be sent to the Ministry of Labour, Minister Lee Sang- Soo at 82-2-504-6708, 82-2-507-4755 (Fax) or e-mail at m_molab@molab.go.kr And sent to the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs, Minister Lee Yong-Sup at 82-2-2100-4001(Fax) or e-mail at yongsupl@mogaha.go.kr
Please be sure to send copies to the KCTU at 82-2-2635-1134(Fax) or e-mail at inter@kctu.org
3. Please visit the international campaign web-site on the KCTU homepage and leave your solidarity message or protest letter on it.
If you have any questions or need more information, please contact:
Lee Changgeun
International Director
Korean Confederation of Trade Unions
Tel.: +82-2-2670-9234 Fax: +82-2-2635-1134
E-mail: inter@kctu.org Web-site : http://kctu.org
2nd Fl. Daeyoung Bld., 139 Youngdeungpo-2-ga, Youngdeungpo-ku, Seoul 150-032 Korea
Fundamental Trade Union Rights in South Korea is Hijacked by the Unjust Deal of September 11
- Problems with the “Grand Tripartite Agreement” for the Advancement of Industrial Relations
1. Introduction
On September 11, the South Korean government announced the “Grand Tripartite Agreement” on the Roadmap for Industrial Relations Reforms. The proposed agreement was negotiated and agreed by the members of the tripartite committee---the Ministry of Labor, the Korean Employer’s Federation, the Korean chamber of Commerce, and the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU). However, one of the tripartite members, the Koran Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) representing 800,000 members was deliberately excluded from this meeting. The KCTU was not even notified about the meeting itself even though they had been participating in previous meetings.
The unjust and undemocratic “9-11 deal” falls far short of the legislative intention of the original plan to reform industrial relations laws and systems, much less some kind of actual “advancement” in industrial relations. The South Korean government had publicly declared that the main principles behind the original policy to revamp industrial relations were to “build industrial relations that conform to international standards, form multiple-level social partnership and to establish voluntary industrial relations grounded in both autonomy and responsibility.”
Since the unjust and undemocratic “9-11 deal” once again defer enterprise-level union pluralism in exchange for postponing prohibition on wage payment to full-time union officers (who have 100% time-off for union activities) and excludes legislative ground to allow institutionalization of industrial-level collective bargaining, it not only fails miserably at constructing a multiple structure for industrial relations but rather consolidates enterprise-level unionism. Furthermore, the “9-11 deal” seriously contravenes the principle of “autonomy with responsibility” in that it introduces excessive legislative intervention regarding the right to strike for workers in the public sector.
The South Korean government has been most responsible for bringing about these outcomes. In 2003, after the government announced its hastily-constructed “Roadmap of the Advancement of Industrial Relations Laws and Systems,” it made no effort whatsoever in making the legislation concrete or specific in light of the realities facing South Korean workers. Instead, the laws simply focused on building the government’s agenda without full consultation and bona fide negotiations with the concerned parties. In light of the government’s manipulation of the situation, critical challenges for decisively reshaping the very future of the South Korean industrial relations shrank from discussions to a mere object of barter.
2. Major Contents of the “9-11 Deal”
The following is a summary of the most harmful provisions included in the “9-11 Deal”.
Enterprise-level Union Pluralism: extending the prohibition (it was originally to be lifted in 2006) on enterprise-level union pluralism for an additional three years.
Ban on wage payments to full-time union officers: the current law prohibits wage payment of full-time union officers. The amendment would postpone the implementation for an additional three years.
Replacement workers at essential public services and compulsory arbitration: In exchange for abolishing compulsory arbitration, the scope of “essential” public services will be broadly expanded, and the replacement workers will be implemented at a full scare. Furthermore, “essential” public services will be now subjected to maintenance of minimum services obligation. Yet because the “emergency mediation” clause, which contains compulsory arbitration, was not repealed, workers in the essential public services shall be subject to a three-fold regulation (replacement work, obligation to maintain “minimum” services, compulsory arbitration under emergency mediation).
Unfair dismissal: introduction of a monetary compensation system so when workers are unfairly dismissed, instead of the employer reinstating the worker to her/his original position after it has been proven to be an unfair dismal, the employer now only have to pay compensation to the worker. In addition the penal punishment imposed on employers who unfairly dismiss workers has been abolished so now there are no longer any sanctions against employers for unfair dismissals.
Dismissal for managerial reasons (redundancy dismissal): When employers choose to conduct mass layoffs for managerial reasons, the “prior notice period” has been vastly reduced from 60 days to days due to “labor market flexibility.” Because of this, over 90% of the work places are likely to give a notification of 30 days prior to mass dismissal instead of the current 60-days prior notice.
While these problematic provisions were included, the following items submitted by the KCTU to advance industrial relations were not---institutionalization of industrial-level collective bargaining, ensuring fundamental trade union rights for disguised self-employed worker, government employees, professors, and teachers, and reforming the abuse of damages claims and provisional seizure of assets [punishing strike action] system.
3. Detailed Comparisons
1) Enterprise-level Union Pluralism and Ban on Wage Payment to Full-time Union Officers
The South Korean government has already postponed the implementation of enterprise-level union pluralism for the last 10 years under the excuse of the prevention of social unrests and the need of preparation period.
On September 11, the government once again postponed the legislation of union pluralism at the enterprise level for a further three years under the same reasons of preventing social unrest, in exchange for the postponement of ban on wage payment to full-time union officers for the same period. However, the legalization of enterprise-level union pluralism is the very heart of internationally-recognised fundamental trade union rights, which should be implemented immediately. The South Korean tripartite members have been given a long ten years of preparation for this to be a reality.
It should be noted that there are hardly any other major country in the world that has continuously prohibited union pluralism at the enterprise level through a legislative fiat. Clearly, such prohibitions violate international standards relating to freedom of association specifically as outlines by the ILO conventions.
Not only does deferment of enterprise-level union pluralism seriously restrict the autonomous right to form unions, but it will also have a pronounced effect in blocking fundamental trade union rights for irregular workers and workers at small and medium-sized enterprises. These consequences will undoubtedly stymie efforts to increase the overall union density in South Korea.
In case of the question of wage payments by employers to fulltime union officers, it is a separate issue thus it should not be connected to union pluralism at the enterprise-level. The ILO’s Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) have has repeatedly recommended the government to allow workers and employers to conduct free and voluntary negotiations in respect of this matter, rather than to legislate on this issue.
So the ban on wage payment to union officers by the legislation also falls far short of international standards, and the South Korean government should repeal the related articles, section 24(2) of the TULRAA. However, the South Korean government and the participating concerned parties of the “9-11 Deal” has not challenged this principle but merely postponed it at the sacrifice of fundamental trade union rights including the legalization of union pluralism at the enterprise level.
The KCTU urges the South Korean government and concerned parties that the question of enterprise-level union pluralism should not be an object of barter for a deal of anything.
<Related ILO Committee on Freedom Association Recommendations and Principles>1. 340th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association (March, 2006)(i) to take rapid steps for the legalization of trade union pluralism at the enterprise level, in full consultation with all social partners concerned, so as to guarantee at all levels the right of workers to establish and join the organization of their own choosing;(ii) to enable workers and employers to conduct free and voluntary negotiations in respect of the question of payment of wages by employers to full-time union officials;2. 309th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association (March, 1998)The Committee considers that the prohibition of the payment of full-time union officials by employers is a matter which should not be subject to legislative interference. It therefore calls upon the Government to repeal section 24(2) of the TULRAA.3. ILO Committee on the Freedom of Association Even though it may well be in the workers’ interest to have one sole union, compelling union monism by law contravenes article 2 of convention 87. There is a fundamental difference between a situation in which the law enforces union monism and a situation in which workers have composed a single union of their own accord. Direct and indirect intervention by the State--in particular, intervention by the State through the law--cannot be justified by saying that avoidance of contention among multiple unions is advantageous to the realization of workers’ rights and interests.
2) Essential Public Services and Compulsory Arbitration
The South Korean government has been publicizing itself as having approached international labor standards by repealing provisions mandating compulsory arbitration for essential public services. However, a close look at the specific wording reveals that while the ILO recommended reducing the scope of “essential” public services, the South Korean government has done the reverse and in fact expanded the scope.
Without reasonable grounding, the “9-11deal” adds the following to the “essential” public services: air transport, blood supply, treatment of waste water and sewage and steam and hot water supply. In addition, the railroad services, the subway and the petroleum sector still remain on the list of “essential” public services, even though the CFA of the ILO, “considers those sectors do not constitute the essential services in the strict sense of the term whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.”
Consequently, even though compulsory arbitration is repealed on paper, workers in the “essential” public services will be subject to imposition of Emergency Mediation, which includes compulsory arbitration with additional obligations to maintain minimum services as well as the imposition of a replacement workforce. In a nutshell, these workers will be subject to a 3-fold regulation that would effectively cut back on their right to exercise the right to collective actions.
<Related ILO Committee of Freedom Association Recommendations and Principles>1. 327th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association (March, 2002)488. Regarding the scope of essential public services, currently listed in section 71(2) of the TULRAA, where the right to strike could be prohibited, the Committee notes with interest that inner-city bus services and banking services were removed from this list as of 1 January 2001. Consequently, the remaining public services where the right to strike could be prohibited include railroad services (including intercity rail), water, electricity, gas supply, oil refinery and supply services, hospital services and telecommunications services. The Committee considers that railroad services, the subway and the petroleum sector which remain on this list do not constitute essential services in the strict sense of the term whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. They constitute, however, in the circumstances of this case, public services where a minimum service which is negotiated between the trade unions, the employers and the public authorities could be maintained in the event of a strike so as to ensure that the basic needs of the users of these services are satisfied. Noting the Government’s statement that discussions will continue in the Tripartite Commission on further modifying the scope of essential public services in line with ILO principles on freedom of association, the Committee would request the Government to further amend the list of essential public services contained in section 71 of the TULRAA so that the right to strike may be prohibited only in essential services in the strict sense of the term.2. 340th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association (March, 2006)781.-(b) As regards the other legislative aspects of this case, the Committee urges the Government:(iii) to amend the list of essential public services in section 71(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Amendment Act (TULRAA) so that the right to strike may be restricted only in essential services in the strict sense of the term;
3) Replacement Workforce
The 9-11 unjust and undemocratic deal takes the position of allowing replacement workforce through new hiring whereas ILO standards protect workers’ right to strike without having to give up their jobs in exchange. Enabling new hiring during a strike makes it difficult for workers to return to their original jobs after a strike, and thus does not conform to international standards.
4) Industrial-level Collective Bargaining
The “9-11 deal” thoroughly excludes the KCTU proposal relating to institutionalization of industrial union bargaining relations. Transformation of enterprise-level unions to industrial unions has already reached 65.4% in the KCTU; yet, only a tiny number have concluded their collective bargaining agreements through actual industrial-level collective bargaining.
This forms a striking contrast to the major nations of the West, where there are institutional mechanisms for stable industrial bargaining. Not only does the South Korean labor laws lack legal mechanisms to rein-in employers who evade bargaining responsibilities, but the labor law also defines lawful industrial action so narrowly that industrial actions taken by industrial unions are unprotected.
Furthermore, South Korea is among the worst in collective bargaining agreement coverage among OECD nations; as the scope of coverage stalls at about 10%, which is even lower than the union density of 11%. This is due to the requirements for extending application of industrial agreements to a region are excessively demanding (requiring 2/3 of the workers in that region), extending protections (beyond the enterprise level) is impracticable and there exists no system comparable to internationally recognized ones that extend the efficacy of industrial collective agreements to the industrial level.
5) Government Employees
The issue of fundamental trade union rights for government employees was likewise completely excluded. The “Act on the Establishment and Operation, etc. of Public Officials’ Trade Unions” came into effect on January 28, 2006. The act, which was supposed to guarantee the trade union rights of government employees, instead severely limits their trade union rights and union activities. Indeed the act was unilaterally legislated by the government without any consultations with government employees unions concerned.
The KCTU and the KGEU raised the issue on government employees’ trade union rights in the tripartite representatives meetings, and an agreement was made in July between the government and the unions to table the agenda on government employees’ union rights during forthcoming negotiations. Since then, however, no meetings on the issue were held. The Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs (MOGAHA) had refused to participate in the negotiating table and furthermore, claimed that the tripartite representatives meeting should not even deal with the issue, contradicting the agreement made in July.
Instead, the government squeezed up the repressive waves against the KGEU, the largest trade union in civil service representing around 140,000 government employees.
Despite the fact that the ILO adopted recommendations on government employees’ trade union rights in March, 2006, shortly after, the MOGAHA issued the “Directive to Promote the Transformation of Illegal Organisations into Legal Trade Unions (Voluntary Withdrawal of Membership)” - identifying the KGEU as an illegal organization on the basis that it hasn’t submitted notice of establishment pursuant to the new act. The Ministry also indicated that “no dialogue and collective bargaining will be permitted for the KGEU, “an illegal organization” and instructed all government offices “to force transformation of KGEU locals into a “legal” trade union and to issue orders to “voluntarily” withdraw membership from the KGEU. The Ministry even instructed local governments to threate