교섭단위분리제도의 실제적 운영과 법적 과제 - 부산지방노동위원회 2015. 6. 17. 2015단위19 현대중공업 교섭단위 분리 결정 - = Actual Operation and Legal Problems of Separation System of Bargaining Unit - Focusing on Ulsan Hyundai Heavy Industries Bargaining Unit Separation Decision (Busan Local Labor Committee 2015 Unit 19) -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

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.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 조용만, "헌법상 단체교섭권의 보장과 교섭창구단일화제도" (42) : 2012

2 김미영, "한국과 미국의 단체교섭법제 비교 ― 교섭단위와 교섭대표제를 중심으로 ―" 한국노동법학회 (40) : 205-246, 2011

3 김영문, "복수노조와 협약자율 ― 교섭창구단일화와 소수노조와 관련하여 ―" 한국노동법학회 (38) : 1-76, 2011

4 중앙노동위원회, "복수노조업무매뉴얼"

5 중앙노동위원회, "복수노조업무매뉴얼"

6 김미영, "미국 교섭단위제도에서 사업장내 파견ㆍ용역근로자의 단체교섭권 연구" 한국노동법학회 (38) : 117-149, 2011

7 김형배, "노동법" 박영사 2015

8 임종률, "노동법" 박영사 2016

9 이승욱, "기업별 복수노조와 교섭창구의 단일화" 한국노동법학회 (21) : 31-68, 2005

10 권혁, "교섭창구단일화제도와 산별교섭" 한국노동법학회 (43) : 1-29, 2012

11 박종희, "교섭창구 단일화 제도의 시행에 따른 쟁점 및 그에 대한 합리적 해결방안에 관한 연구" 법학연구원 (71) : 231-291, 2013

12 박종희, "교섭창구 단일화 방안의 안정적 정착을 위한 해석방안" 안암법학회 (34) : 523-553, 2011

13 김상호, "교섭단위의 분리에 관한 법적 쟁점의 고찰" 한국노동법학회 (43) : 61-95, 2012

14 이승욱, "교섭단위분리제도에 관한 연구" 중앙노동위원회 2010

15 이정, "‘자율교섭’과 ‘교섭단위분리’에 관한 법적 쟁점" 한국노동법학회 (41) : 255-285, 2012