교섭단위분리제도의 실제적 운영과 법적 과제 - 부산지방노동위원회 2015. 6. 17. 2015단위19 현대중공업 교섭단위 분리 결정 -

방준식 노동법이론실무학회 2017 노동법포럼 Vol.- No.20

The bargaining unit separation system should not be used as a means of unfair labor practice by the user unilaterally applying for bargaining unit separation. Article 29 (3) (2) of the Trade Union Law, which allows users to apply for separation of bargaining units, should be applied only to the labor union or at least through labor-management agreement. This is because, as an exception to the unification bargaining system, labor unions can obtain autonomous bargaining with the consent of the employer or, if the user does not agree, apply for separation of the bargaining unit so that the constitutionally guaranteed status of the collective bargaining right. As we have seen in the case of Hyundai Heavy Industries, it is not known what the intention of the user actually was in relation to the extension of the collective agreement. However, in order to exclude the possibility of illegal labor by the employer in the future, will be. On the other hand, whether or not it is possible to apply for a reduction on the previous negotiating table should be made possible only by the consent of the labor and management parties in return for respecting the Labor Committee’s decision to separate the bargaining unit. In addition, the decision to separate the bargaining unit should continue to be valid until the next bargaining unit separation decision is made. The Labor Relations Commission will not question the decision to separate the bargaining units and avoid the decision to separate the bargaining units through reconciliation between the parties. Meanwhile, since the Labor Relations Commission is required to make a decision on separation of bargaining units, separation of bargaining units is not possible by labor-management agreement. In addition, it should be said that it is not possible to integrate bargaining units autonomously by labor-management agreement after the labor committee has decided to separate bargaining units. This is because it is a principle that the bargaining units can not be separated by autonomous agreement between labor and management parties. Finally, in order to determine whether or not to separate the bargaining unit, the Labor Relations Commission should analyze the various cases in which it is necessary to consider differences in working conditions, employment type, and bargaining practices in one business or workplace. It is necessary to set clear criteria for the possibility.

리그닌 나노입자의 첨가가 전기방사된 PVA 나노섬유의 물리화학적 특성에미치는 영향

방준식,정승오,윤희철,진형준,곽효원 한국고분자학회 2023 폴리머 Vol.47 No.6

Among lignocelluloses, a component of wood, lignin is currently in the limelight as a green additive for imparting various functions such as reinforcing the mechanical strength of general-purpose plastics, antioxidation, and UV protection. In this study, lignin nanoparticles (LNPs) with a size of 100-200 nm were prepared using a gamma-valero-lactone-based solvent system. The prepared LNPs were added to poly vinyl alcohol (PVA), and PVA nanofibers incor-porated into the LNPs were successfully prepared through electrospinning. The tensile strength of the PVA/LNPs nanofibers was improved by up to 338% as LNPs were added, and the morphology of the nanofibers was stably main-tained without melting even when heat was applied at 200 ℃, which is above the melting point of the matrix polymer. In addition, the added LNPs effectively prevented the degradation of PVA nanofibers by UV exposure. These results sug-gest that LNPs can be used as natural polymer additives that can provide effects such as thermal and mechanical stability and photolysis resistance to PVA nanofibers.

Preparation and Characterization of Hydrophobic Coatings from Carnauba Wax/Lignin Blends

방준식,김정규,김윤진,오정권,여환명,곽효원 한국목재공학회 2022 목재공학 Vol.50 No.3

To realize the infinite possibilities of materials derived from wood, it is necessary to overcome the weak moisture stability of wood. Thus, the development of an eco-friendly hydrophobic coating agent is essential, and of these, woody biomass-based materials are strongly attractive as coatings. In this study, eco-friendly hydrophobic wood coatings were prepared using carnauba wax purified from palm leaves and sprouts, and kraft lignin. The physicochemical properties of the carnauba wax/lignin blends according to the ratio of carnauba wax and lignin were observed by morphology and functional group change. In addition, the coating performance of carnauba wax/lignin blend coatings was confirmed by measuring the contact angle change. It was found that the addition of lignin could accelerate the atomization of wax particles, and that micro-roughness can be realized when applied to the actual wood surface, to ensure that the coating effect over time lasts longer. In addition, it was confirmed that the addition of lignin increases the hydrogen-bond-based interaction with the wood of the coating, thereby providing better coating stability and increasing the durability of the coating solvent under friction. The carnauba wax/lignin paint developed in this way is eco-friendly because all components are made of wood-based raw materials and have an excellent affinity with wood surfaces. Therefore, it is expected to be applicable to the coating process of wood-plastic composites and timber composites.

노동조합의 조합활동과 그 제한 - 유인물 배포와 선전물 부착을 중심으로 -

방준식 한국경영법률학회 2007 經營法律 Vol.18 No.1

【Abstract】 A Study on the Limit of the Labor Union's Activities Bang, Joon-Sik Type of collective acts which are not exempted from liability by the collective bargaining right and the dispute right are protected within certain limits, if they fall within the scope of propriety, by "the right to engage in union activities." Like that of the dispute right, the scope of this protection is determined by the parties, objectives and circumstances of the union activity. With regard to the "parties" aspect of the union activity, one must be able to say that the activity is a "union activity" or an act performed for the benefit of a union. As for its objectives, they need not be "pressure tactics in collective bargaining" which are protected as a dispute right. They are, however, limited by the underlying purposes of Article 33 of the Constitution. It is proper to express this in terms of "collective bargaining or other worker's mutual aid or protection." When one looks at the modes of union activity, in contrast to a dispute act, union activity that is intended to hinder an employer's operation of its business will not be approved if it violates the duty of service or the obligation of loyalty emanating from a labor contract. On the other hnad, it must be considered an important circumstance that the posting of handbills and then wearing of ribbons occur as dispute measures during a dispute. Upon such a considerration, the propriety of such acts should be examined within the context of the right to engage in union activities.

Effect of Chemically Modified Lignin Addition on the Physicochemical Properties of PCL/lignin Nanofibers

방준식,박상우,김정규,김윤진,정민정,정승오,곽효원 한국고분자학회 2022 한국고분자학회 학술대회 연구논문 초록집 Vol.47 No.2

부당노동행위 구제신청의 주체와 구제명령의 상대방인 사용자* —대상판결: 대법원 2022.5.12. 선고 2017두54005 판결

방준식 노동법이론실무학회 2023 노동법포럼 Vol.- No.38

The subject of an unfair labor practice remedy application is not only the workers and trade unions whose rights are directly violated by the employer, but also the specific labor union whose rights are indirectly infringed by the employer's unfair labor practice against the workers and unions. You can be the subject of a claim for relief in your name. Furthermore, even in the case of plural unions, the unfair labor practice of the bargaining representative union against minority unions must be acknowledged. Therefore, in the relationship between the minority union and the bargaining representative union, the minority union can be the subject of the unfair labor practice remedy request, and the bargaining representative union can be the counterparty of the unfair labor practice remedy order. Also, in the case of non-legal unions, if they have autonomy and democracy, they should be able to apply for remedy for unfair labor practices. It's just that there is no certificate of establishment, and if it is a labor union guaranteed by the constitution, there is no reason to exclude it from the application for relief. On the other hand, the employer, the counterparty of the unfair labor practice remedy order, includes not only the legal party, the business owner, but also the business management manager or business manager,who is the actual actor. This is because the effectiveness of the remedy order can be secured while quickly prohibiting the actual unfair labor practice to the person in charge of business management or business manager other than the business owner by expanding the counterparty to comply with the remedy order to prohibit unfair labor practice inside the company. And in relation to the violation of the duty of fair representation in the process of unifying the bargaining channels, it is necessary to legislatively recognize unfair labor practices of the bargaining representative union in addition to unfair labor practices caused by employer domination and intervention. This is because it is necessary to eradicate the violation of the duty of fair representation by the negotiating representative union, which actually occurs against minority unions, through the unfair labor practice system. 부당노동행위 구제신청의 주체는 사용자로부터 직접적으로 권리를침해당한 근로자와 노동조합 뿐만 아니라 그 근로자와 노동조합에 대한사용자의 부당노동행위로 인해 간접적으로 자신의 권리를 침해당한 특정 노동조합도 자신의 이름으로 구제신청의 주체가 될 수 있다. 더 나아가 복수노조의 경우에도 소수노조에 대한 교섭대표노동조합의 부당노동행위를 인정할 수 있어야 한다. 따라서 소수노조와 교섭대표노동조합과의 관계에서 소수노조는 부당노동행위 구제신청의 주체가 될 수 있으며, 교섭대표노동조합은 부당노동행위 구제명령의 상대방이 될 수 있다. 또한 법외노조의 경우도 자주성과 민주성이 있다면 부당노동행위 구제신청을 할 수 있어야 한다. 단지 설립신고증이 없을 뿐이지 헌법상 보장된 노동조합이라면 구제신청에서 배제해야 할 이유가 없기 때문이다. 한편, 부당노동행위 구제명령의 상대방인 사용자는 법적 당사자인사업주뿐만 아니라 현실의 행위자인 사업경영담당자나 사업관리자도포함한다. 부당노동행위를 금지시키도록 구제명령을 이행해야 할 상대방을 기업 내부적으로 확장함으로써 사업주 외에 사업경영담당자나사업관리자에게 현실의 부당노동행위를 신속하게 금지시키면서 구제명령의 실효성을 확보할 수 있기 때문이다. 또한 복수노조제도 및 교섭창구단일화제도의 시행 이후에 현실적으로 발생하고 있는 교섭대표노조와 소수노조 사이의 갈등문제를 해결하기 위해서는 노동조합법상부당노동행위의 유형으로 교섭대표노동조합의 부당노동행위를 인정해야 할 것이다. 특히 교섭창구단일화 과정에서의 공정대표의무 위반과관련하여 사용자의 지배·개입의 부당노동행위 외에 교섭대표노동조합의 부당노동행위를 입법적으로 인정할 필요가 있다. 소수노조에 대해현실적으로 발생하는 교섭대표노동조합의 공정대표의무 위반이 노동조합법상 부당노동행위제도를 통해 근절시킬 필요가 있기 때문이다. 마지막으로, 대상판결 이후의 후속조치로서 노동위원회는 부당노동행위 구제명령의 실효성을 확보하기 위해 현실의 행위자에 대한 구제명령을 구체적으로 내릴 필요가 있을 것이다. 지금과 같이 단지 부당노동행위를 인정한다거나 공고문이나 판정문을 게시판에 공고하라는 등의 소극적인 구제명령보다는 금지형+명령형의 구제명령과 같이현실의 행위자인 사용자에 대한 즉각적인 부당노동행위 금지명령을내림으로써 구제제도의 실효성을 확보해야 할 것이다

근로형태의 다양화와 노동법의 대응

방준식 노동법이론실무학회 2019 노동법포럼 Vol.- No.26

The management techniques for diversifying working types in management have been developed and used in practice, but management has a different area of interest compared to labor law. In other words, management is not interested in the various legal issues that arise from working relationships, so ultimately there are clear limits to the protection of workers. Therefore, changes in the working contract relationship and the protection of the worker concerned due to contract subcontracting are not areas of management but areas of labor law. Nevertheless, considering the results of research in the field of labor law so far, it is true that the labor law's reasoning under the premise that the labor contract forms a working relationship, but under the condition of establishing a working relationship through contract or contract of attorney, has actually not been carried out properly. Therefore, it will be necessary to reexamine the system of the Korean Labor Law, which has developed around job security and improvement of working conditions through legal examination of diversification of working types, such as subcontracting of labor contracts in the future. It will also be necessary to lay the basis for labor law management techniques in management studies that seek to diversify their work forms, and to present legislative solutions that are faithful to the fundamental purpose of the labor law, namely worker protection. 이상에서 살펴 본 바와 같이 경영학에서 근로형태의 다양화를 위한 경영기법이 다양하게 개발되어 실무에서도 활용되고 있지만, 기본적으로 경영학은 노동법학과 비교하여 그 학문적 관심영역이 다른 것이다. 즉, 경영학은 근로관계에서 새롭게 발생되는 다양한 법적 문제에는 관심이 없기 때문에 궁극적으로 근로자의 보호에는 명백한 한계가 있다. 따라서 근로계약의 도급화로 인한 근로계약관계의 변화와 해당근로자의 보호의 문제는 경영학이 아닌 노동법학의 영역이라 할 것이다. 그럼에도 불구하고 현재까지 노동법분야의 연구결과물을 살펴봤을 때 근로계약이 근로관계를 형성한다는 명제를 전제로 할 뿐 도급계약이나 위임계약 등을 통한 근로관계의 성립을 전제로 하는 노동법적 논증작업은 사실상 제대로 이루어지지 않은 것이 사실이다. 따라서 장차 근로계약의 도급화와 같은 근로형태의 다양화에 대한 법적 고찰을 통해 근로자의 지위보장과 근로조건의 향상을 중심으로 발전해 온 우리 노동법의 체계를 새롭게 재검토할 필요가 있을 것이다. 또한 근로형태의 다양화를 모색한 경영학에서의 경영기법에 대한 노동법적 근거를 마련하고, 근로자보호라는 노동법의 본질적인 목적에 충실한 입법적 해결방안도 제시할 필요가 있을 것이다.

기업도산시 집단적 노사관계의 문제점

방준식 노동법이론실무학회 2009 정기학술대회 Vol.2009 No.-

저성과자 해고에 관한 법적 검토

방준식 노동법이론실무학회 2022 노동법포럼 Vol.- No.35

이 논문은 저성과자 해고의 정당성을 판단하는데 있어서 필요한 법적 쟁점들을 검토하였다. 특히 저성과자 해고가 문제된 지점이 취업규칙에 규정되어 있는 저성과의 내용(업무능력 결여나 근무성적 부진)이 해고사유에 해당하는지, 만일 해고사유라면 그 해고사유가 계약위반인지 사업장질서위반인지에 따라 법적 평가가 다르다는 점에 착안하였다. 또한 저성과자 해고의 내용은 계약위반에 따른 일반해고와 사업장질서 위반에 따른 징계해고로 구분될 수 있음을 확인하였다. 다만, 저성과 자체는 사업장질서위반이라기 보다는 채무불이행과 관련된 계약위반이기에 그 계약위반에 따른 해고에 대한 정당성 판단을 위해서는 입법적으로 근로계약법의 제정이 필요하다는 점을 강조하였다. 한편, 취업규칙의 법적 성질에 있어서 계약적 성질을 강조할 경우, 저성과자 해고의 문제는 양당사자의 합의에 따른 것으로서 유효하게 된다. 반면에 법규범적 성질을 강조할 경우, 저성과자 해고의 문제는 취업규칙의 내용통제에 따라 합리적인 범위 내에서 유효하게 된다. 따라서 취업규칙에서 정하는 퇴출프로그램에 의한 저성과자 해고는 합리적인 범위 내에 있다고 볼 수 없을 것이다. 원래 저성과는 노무급부와 관련된 내용으로서 사업장질서와는 적합하지 않다. 반면에 취업규칙의 계약적 성질에 근거하여 저성과자 해고를 취업규칙에 규정하더라도 무방할 것이다. 다만 저성과자라는 이유만으로 해고로 나아갈 경우에는 정당성이 인정되기 어렵다. 법원의 판례를 살펴보더라도 저성과자는 저성과 이후 사용자의 교육명령 및 훈련지시에 불복종하거나 노력하지 않은 경우에 징계해고로 나아갈 가능성이 높기 때문이다. 따라서 저성과만을 이유로 하는 일반적인 통상해고는 적합하지 않다고 해야 할 것이다. 다음으로, 앞에서 살펴 본 바와 같이 취업규칙상 해고사유로서 제시되는 저성과 그 자체는 행위규범으로서 불확실한 요건이기 때문에 해고의 정당성을 완성시키지 않는다. 즉, 추가적으로 사회통념상 고용관계를 더 이상 기대할 수 없을 정도로 근로자의 귀책사유가 있어야 하는데, 그 정도에 관해서는 결국 법원의 판단에 맡길 수밖에 없다는 한계가 있다. 더욱이 통상해고와 징계해고는 구분되는데 저성과자의 통상해고는 정당성 여부가 문제되고, 징계해고는 행위의 확정성으로 인해 결과적으로 징계양정의 문제만 남는 것이다. 또한 저성과자에 대한 인사평가는 합리적이고 공정한 평가가 요구된다. 이는 정리해고의 4요건 중 합리적이고 공정한 기준에 의한 대상자 선발과 유사하다. 최근의 PIP나 AI의 활용도 이러한 합리적이고 공정한 평가를 위한 수단이지만, 아직은 평가기준으로서 확립되지 않았기 때문에 이에 관한 구체적인 연구가 앞으로 필요하리라고 생각한다. 마지막으로, 지금까지 근로관계의 종료와 관련해서는 사용자측의 일방적 의사표시인 해고에 대한 노동법적 규제가 주된 내용이었다. 반면에 근로자측의 일방적 의사표시인 사직이나 근로자와 사용자 사이의 합의해지에 관해서는 노동법의 주된 논의대상이 아니었다. 프랑스는 우리나라보다 해고가 더욱 엄격하게 제한되어 있는데, 프랑스 노동법전에 법정 합의해지제도를 도입함으로써 합의해지의 절차를 통한 계약당사자간의 고용조정기능을 확보하였다. 합의해지에 관한 별도의 법적 절차규정이 없는 우리나라에 시사 ... This thesis does not focus on judging the justification for dismissal of low performers. Rather, it is based on the fact that the problem with the dismissal of low-performing workers differs depending on whether the low performance stipulated in the employment rules is a reason for dismissal and, if so, whether the reason for dismissal is a violation of contract or workplace order. The details of dismissal for low performers can be divided into general dismissal for breach of contract and disciplinary dismissal for violation of workplace order. However, he emphasized the need for enactment of a separate labor contract law in order to judge the justification for dismissal due to the breach of contract, since the low performance itself is a breach of contract related to default rather than a breach of workplace order. On the other hand, if the contractual nature is emphasized in the legal nature of the employment rules, the issue of dismissal of low performers becomes valid as an agreement between both parties. On the other hand, if the legal and legal nature is emphasized, the issue of dismissal of low performers becomes effective within a reasonable range according to the content control of the employment rules. Therefore, the dismissal of low-performing workers through the expulsion program stipulated in the employment rules cannot be considered to be within a reasonable range. Originally, low performance is related to labor benefits and is not suitable for workplace order. Therefore, it is okay to stipulate the dismissal of underperforming workers in the employment rules based on the contractual nature of the employment rules. However, it is difficult to justify the dismissal of employees just because they are low performing. In general, low performers are more likely to lead to disciplinary dismissal if they disobey the employer's education orders and training instructions or do not make efforts after low performing. Therefore, it should be said that ordinary dismissal is not appropriate for the sole reason of low performance. As discussed above, low performance (lack of work ability and poor work performance) suggested as a reason for dismissal does not in itself recognize justification for dismissal. This is because low performance as a reason for dismissal is an uncertain requirement as a code of conduct. In other words, according to social norm, there must be a reason attributable to the worker to the extent that an employment relationship can no longer be expected. In addition, there is a distinction between ordinary dismissal and disciplinary dismissal. In the case of ordinary dismissal of low performers, the question of whether or not it is justified or not, and disciplinary dismissal due to the certainty of the action, as a result, only the issue of disciplinary action remains. In addition, a reasonable and fair evaluation is required for personnel evaluation of low performers. This is similar to the selection of candidates based on reasonable and fair criteria among the four conditions for dismissal. The recent use of PIP or AI is also a means for such a reasonable and fair evaluation, but since it has not yet been established as an evaluation standard, I think that in-depth research on this is needed in the future. Lastly, regarding the termination of the labor relationship so far, the main content has been the labor law regulation of dismissal, which is the unilateral expression of the employer's intention. On the other hand, resignation, which is a unilateral expression of intention by the employee, or termination of an agreement between the employee and the employer was not the main subject of discussion in the Labor Law. France has stricter restrictions on dismissal than Korea. By introducing the statutory agreement termination system in the Labor Code, the employment mediation function between the contracting parties has been secured through the agreement termination procedure. It has great implicati...

프랜차이즈계약에 의한 근로관계의 성립여부

방준식 한국경영법률학회 2007 經營法律 Vol.17 No.4

【Zusammenfassung】 Die Abgrenzung von Franchisebeziehungen und Arbeitsverhältnissen Joon-Sik Bang Franchisenehmer sind stets Inhaber einer eigenen Unternehmensor- ganisation, selbst wenn sie keine Mitarbeiter beschäftigen. Das Betriebsführungs-Know-How stellt das wesentliche immaterielle Betriebskapital und damit die Grundlage eigener Unternehmensführung dar. Dadurch werden Franchisenehmer in die Lage versetzt, selbst werbend am Markt aufzutreten und ihre Arbeitskraft im Rahmen der eigenen Unternehmenorganisation zu verwerten. Dadurch unterscheiden sich Franchisenehmer essentiell von anderen neuen Selbständigen wie Propagandisten und Ein-Mann-Transfortunternehmen, denen kein entsprechendes Betriebsführungs-Know-How zur Verfügung gestellt wird. Da Franchisenehmer neben ihrer eigenen Unternehmensorganisation über eine direkte Marktorientierung verfügung und ihnen ihr Betriebsergebnis auch unmittelbar zugerechnet wird, besitzen sie grundsätzlich die Möglichkeit, neben unternehmerischen Risiken auch unternehmerische Chancen wahrzunehmen. Die Weisung- und kontrollrechte, denen Franchisenehmer bei ihrer Tätigkeit unterliegen können, lassen sich in prozeß- und ergebnisorientierte Anweisungen und Kontrollen einerseits sowie personenbesogene Weisungsrechte andererseits unterscheiden. Der hier vertretene These, daß Franchisebeziehungen in keinem Fall dem Arbeitsrecht zu unterwerfen sind, führt also nicht zur Schutzlosigkeit von Franchisenehmern. Sie trägt dagegen zur Rechtssicherheit bei, was für die weitere Entwicklung des Franchising als einer zukunftsträchtigen Form der neuen Selbständigkeit von nicht geringer Bedeutung ist.