RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      정규직과 비정규직 문제에 관한 공법적 검토

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76189147

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      In the present-day capitalistic society, full-time job is a rather popular pattern of employment that allows employees to work until retirement as far as they can hold themselves free from any cause for dismissal. Whereas, part-time job has a certain term of employment fixed by the working contract and terminated automatically at the end of it even when employees are not exposed to any cause for dismissal. Under this system, employees are neither assured of lifelong employment, nor protected by the legal provisions to limit dismissal.
      Therefore, the only and ultimate solution to the issue of part-time employment is to substitute it completely with full-time employment considering that part-time workers are suffering from inferior and differential working conditions including lower wage, harder labor intensity, lack of social security and even employment uncertainty, compared to full-time employees. It is very natural for part-time workers who are put to such harsh conditions to claim for equal treatment to full-time workers, a position that stands in sharp contrast with the management which favors expansion of part-time employment under the flexible employment system. If the highest value can be put on maintaining the decent human life of all social members, then the solution will be found surprisingly easily.
      It seems fair to seek solution by protecting part-time workers through revision of the existing Labor Standard Law while it is thought definitely unfair to make a special law separate from the Labor Standard Law, because legislation of a special law which is to encompass all types of part-time work may give to the people concerned an impression that the part-time employment itself has been legalized. Realistically, it will not be easy as well to cover a vast range of part-time works in a single law systematically and comprehensively.
      The basic right of labor by all workers is already assured by the Constitution and nobody will raise objection to the fact that part-time workers are also provided with the basic right of labor in an unwritten rule. The basic right of part-time workers is thus not the matter of legislation but is the matter of perception and execution. In this sense, no extra law should necessarily be enacted to this end but, instead, efforts should be made to meet the needs, if any, by altering or modifying the related provisions of the Labor Standard Law, the Law of Trade Union and Labor-related Arbitration. It is proposed, however, to abolish the Law governing Protection of Dispatched Laborers which turned out to be used for such evil purposes as exploitation of wages.
      Pending these issues, opinions have been sharply divided between the government and the labor organizations. As recently as Sep. 10, 2004, the government announced plans to legislate the law for protection of part- or short-time employment(proposal) and the law for protection of dispatched workers(proposal).
      Before closing, it must be added that as this paper sums up what was published at the seminar of the Korean Comparative Public Law Association held on June 26, 2004, the proposed laws cannot be reviewed here.
      번역하기

      In the present-day capitalistic society, full-time job is a rather popular pattern of employment that allows employees to work until retirement as far as they can hold themselves free from any cause for dismissal. Whereas, part-time job has a certain ...

      In the present-day capitalistic society, full-time job is a rather popular pattern of employment that allows employees to work until retirement as far as they can hold themselves free from any cause for dismissal. Whereas, part-time job has a certain term of employment fixed by the working contract and terminated automatically at the end of it even when employees are not exposed to any cause for dismissal. Under this system, employees are neither assured of lifelong employment, nor protected by the legal provisions to limit dismissal.
      Therefore, the only and ultimate solution to the issue of part-time employment is to substitute it completely with full-time employment considering that part-time workers are suffering from inferior and differential working conditions including lower wage, harder labor intensity, lack of social security and even employment uncertainty, compared to full-time employees. It is very natural for part-time workers who are put to such harsh conditions to claim for equal treatment to full-time workers, a position that stands in sharp contrast with the management which favors expansion of part-time employment under the flexible employment system. If the highest value can be put on maintaining the decent human life of all social members, then the solution will be found surprisingly easily.
      It seems fair to seek solution by protecting part-time workers through revision of the existing Labor Standard Law while it is thought definitely unfair to make a special law separate from the Labor Standard Law, because legislation of a special law which is to encompass all types of part-time work may give to the people concerned an impression that the part-time employment itself has been legalized. Realistically, it will not be easy as well to cover a vast range of part-time works in a single law systematically and comprehensively.
      The basic right of labor by all workers is already assured by the Constitution and nobody will raise objection to the fact that part-time workers are also provided with the basic right of labor in an unwritten rule. The basic right of part-time workers is thus not the matter of legislation but is the matter of perception and execution. In this sense, no extra law should necessarily be enacted to this end but, instead, efforts should be made to meet the needs, if any, by altering or modifying the related provisions of the Labor Standard Law, the Law of Trade Union and Labor-related Arbitration. It is proposed, however, to abolish the Law governing Protection of Dispatched Laborers which turned out to be used for such evil purposes as exploitation of wages.
      Pending these issues, opinions have been sharply divided between the government and the labor organizations. As recently as Sep. 10, 2004, the government announced plans to legislate the law for protection of part- or short-time employment(proposal) and the law for protection of dispatched workers(proposal).
      Before closing, it must be added that as this paper sums up what was published at the seminar of the Korean Comparative Public Law Association held on June 26, 2004, the proposed laws cannot be reviewed here.

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
      • Ⅱ. 정규직과 비정규직의 의의
      • Ⅲ. 정규직과 비정규직의 차별에 관한 문제점
      • Ⅳ. 비정규직의 보호를 위한 법적 쟁점과 대책
      • Ⅴ. 결론
      • Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
      • Ⅱ. 정규직과 비정규직의 의의
      • Ⅲ. 정규직과 비정규직의 차별에 관한 문제점
      • Ⅳ. 비정규직의 보호를 위한 법적 쟁점과 대책
      • Ⅴ. 결론
      • 참고문헌
      • 〈Abstract〉
      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 "프랑스의 기간제 파견제 단시간제 근로자 보호관련 규정" 한국노총 중앙연구원 2000

      2 "파트타임 근로의 문제" 도서출판 까치 1993

      3 "파견,용역노동자 노동권쟁취와 간접고용 철폐를 위한 공동대책위원회, 2000년 간접고용 실태보고서" 2000년

      4 "연쇄적 근로계약관계와 해고제한" 월간고시1976.8.

      5 "비정형근로자 보호대책" 2000.

      6 "비정규노동자 기본권보장과 차별철폐를 위한 공동대책위원회, 비정규노동자 권리확보를 위한 백서" 2001.

      7 "비정규 근로형태의 법적 보호방안" 노동법률제111호

      8 "동일가치노동 동일임금원칙에 관한 쟁점" 노동법학 2003.

      9 "동노동임의 의의와 과제-직무평가제도의 가능성과 한계-" 1991

      10 "노동현안에 대한 일본에서의 사례 비정규직 근로자에 대한 비교법적 검토 경총 컨설팅" 2001

      1 "프랑스의 기간제 파견제 단시간제 근로자 보호관련 규정" 한국노총 중앙연구원 2000

      2 "파트타임 근로의 문제" 도서출판 까치 1993

      3 "파견,용역노동자 노동권쟁취와 간접고용 철폐를 위한 공동대책위원회, 2000년 간접고용 실태보고서" 2000년

      4 "연쇄적 근로계약관계와 해고제한" 월간고시1976.8.

      5 "비정형근로자 보호대책" 2000.

      6 "비정규노동자 기본권보장과 차별철폐를 위한 공동대책위원회, 비정규노동자 권리확보를 위한 백서" 2001.

      7 "비정규 근로형태의 법적 보호방안" 노동법률제111호

      8 "동일가치노동 동일임금원칙에 관한 쟁점" 노동법학 2003.

      9 "동노동임의 의의와 과제-직무평가제도의 가능성과 한계-" 1991

      10 "노동현안에 대한 일본에서의 사례 비정규직 근로자에 대한 비교법적 검토 경총 컨설팅" 2001

      11 "노동시장의 변화에 따른 노동법적 대응방안" 현대노사 2000

      12 "기간제및단시간근로자보호등에관한법률안(제정)과 파견근로자보호등에관한법률안(개정)" 노동부 2004

      13 "고용과 직업의 차별대우에 관한 협약 제11호"

      14 "계약제 근로자관련 업무처리지침" 1998

      15 "간접고용규제의 의의와 법적 과제" 민주주의 법학연구회 2001

      16 "Arbeitsrecht" 1998.

      17 "Arbeitsrecht" 1999.

      18 "Arbeits-Handbuch" 2000.

      19 "2001년 비정규노동자 투쟁실태보고서" 2001

      20 "2001년 비정규노동자 투쟁실태보고서" 2001.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2026 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2013-01-01 평가 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2006-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2005-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2003-07-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 1.07 1.07 1.02
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      1.08 1.07 1.097 0.48
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼