JIPYONG LLC

Jipyong News|Newsletter_Labor & Employment

[Recent Court Case 5] The employees responsible for the activities other than HR, compensation, benefits, or labor relations at the level of manager or higher rank should be eligible to join a union.

2020.08.19

[Case No. Busan High Court Decision 2019Na54965 dated Aug. 19, 2020] 
 
In this case, the court held that the employees who are responsible for the activities other than HR, compensation, benefits, or labor relations may join a union even if they are at the level of manager or higher rank. 
 
The plaintiff (the “Plaintiff”) started working at the company (the “Company”) in 1990 and has become the deputy general manager, a position ranked higher than the manager. The Plaintiff joined the regional branch of the metal workers’ union for the manager-level or higher ranked employees in 2013. This branch was separately organized by the employees at the level of manager or higher rank in 2006 when the branch of the metal workers’ union at the Company (the “Branch”) excluded the manager-level or higher ranked employees from the scope of employees eligible to join the union. The Plaintiff and others requested the Branch to integrate the regional branch for the manager-level or higher ranked employees as its affiliated organization, and the Branch passed a resolution stating that “the members of the regional branch for the manager-level or higher ranked employees would be recognized as the members of the Branch when the Branch would establish the detailed regulations.” Based on the resolution, the Plaintiff submitted an application to join the union but the Branch refused the application stating that it “could not approve the application to join the union before it specified the scope of the rights and obligations of the manager-level or higher ranked employees.” The Plaintiff therefore filed a lawsuit against the Branch. 
 
The court of first instance decided against the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Plaintiff could not be deemed to have become a member of the union by the reason the Plaintiff paid the union dues alone when the union had not discussed the organizational structure or operational method of the regional branch for the manager-level or higher ranked employees. 
 
The appellate court, however, ruled that “the worker’s right to join a labor union is guaranteed as a part of the right to organize as provided under the Constitution and the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (the “Trade Union Act”); thus, the labor union should not be permitted to arbitrarily refuse membership to a person who is qualified to be a member of the labor union.” However, the court continued that “the Trade Union Act prohibits ‘a person who acts on behalf of the business owner with regard to the matters concerning the workers’ from joining a labor union to ensure independence of the labor union. Such person refers to a person who is delegated certain authorities and responsibilities by the business owner with respect to matters related to the determination of the working conditions, such as HR, compensation, and labor relations for the workers or the matters of orders, directions, or supervision in terms of the business activities. ‘The person who always acts in the interests of the employer’ refers to a person in a position where the professional obligations and responsibilities directly contract the obligations and responsibilities as the union member, including the employee who participates in the decisions related to labor relations such as HR, compensation, disciplinary action, audit and labor relations management of the workers.” The court concluded that “whether an employee is deemed such a person cannot be determined simply by the job position or title, and an employee who would not have any actual conflict between the performance of the professional duties and the activities as a member of the union would not fall under this category.” 
 
The court further stated that “although the Plaintiff had the title of a deputy general manager, the Plaintiff was responsible for delivery of vehicles which is unrelated to any matters of labor relations, such as HR or compensation. Therefore, the Plaintiff could not be deemed disqualified from joining the Defendant union, and the union should not refuse its membership to a worker within the scope of the membership under the Branch regulations by referring to a collective agreement on the scope of the membership. The lack of the detailed regulations for the regional branch for the manager-level or higher ranked employees could not be an issue attributable to the Plaintiff.” The court lastly stated that there were neither grounds of disqualification for the Plaintiff from joining the union nor justifiable grounds to refuse the membership and that the Plaintiff should be deemed to have the union member status by filing a membership application to the Branch. 
 
This decision put a brake on the practice of automatically terminating union membership of the employees upon promotion to the manager-level or higher rank. It would be important to follow the Supreme Court’s decision.

Newsletter_Labor & Employment [Recent Court Case 1] The employee’s filing of complaint or reporting on the representative, manager, or colleagues at the workplace are not deemed the grounds for disciplinary actions by the reason that the investigative agency made a decision to not prosecute. 2020.08.20

Newsletter_Labor & Employment [Recent Court Case 4] The industrial union leader’s unauthorized entry to business premises should be deemed a justifiable activity to improve the working conditions. 2020.07.29

Back to List

Related Practices

Professionals

Korean Attorney
Ji Yun YANG
+82-2-6200-1652 jyyang@jipyong.com

Related Practices

Professionals

SHARE

Disclaimer

Limited Liabilities