RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    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
    KCI등재

    미국 공정근로기준법과 가사사용인의 법적지위

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101907520

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    In 2000s, California and New York have collectively bargained with the labor union of domestic workers, and passed the Domestic Worker’s Bill of Right to put domestic workers into their own state labor laws, respectively. It has transfered the issues of domestic workers’ working conditions from the sphere of illegal immigrant women or international labor trafficking to the area of labor laws in the U.S. Furthermore, the DOL has revisioned the regulations to narrow the scope of FLSA exemptions for some domestic workers. Such legal changes may reflect the commercialization of household works and rapid growth of personal service jobs in the structure of service economy. Also, South Korea, as a industrial society, has very similar issues to the U.S in the aspect of labor law for domestic workers. When comparing to the U.S, it is difficult to say that the Korean labor laws have been proceeded for including domestic worker in the protection.
    My question is why most of industrial countries have kept domestic workers out of the labor law systems. This is to search for the legal reasons and institutional history excluding the employment of domestic workers from the system of labor laws by analzing and observing the legal changes of the U.S labor laws.
    번역하기

    In 2000s, California and New York have collectively bargained with the labor union of domestic workers, and passed the Domestic Worker’s Bill of Right to put domestic workers into their own state labor laws, respectively. It has transfered the issue...

    In 2000s, California and New York have collectively bargained with the labor union of domestic workers, and passed the Domestic Worker’s Bill of Right to put domestic workers into their own state labor laws, respectively. It has transfered the issues of domestic workers’ working conditions from the sphere of illegal immigrant women or international labor trafficking to the area of labor laws in the U.S. Furthermore, the DOL has revisioned the regulations to narrow the scope of FLSA exemptions for some domestic workers. Such legal changes may reflect the commercialization of household works and rapid growth of personal service jobs in the structure of service economy. Also, South Korea, as a industrial society, has very similar issues to the U.S in the aspect of labor law for domestic workers. When comparing to the U.S, it is difficult to say that the Korean labor laws have been proceeded for including domestic worker in the protection.
    My question is why most of industrial countries have kept domestic workers out of the labor law systems. This is to search for the legal reasons and institutional history excluding the employment of domestic workers from the system of labor laws by analzing and observing the legal changes of the U.S labor laws.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 Elizabeth J. Kennedy, "When the Shop Floor is in the Living Room: Toward a Domestic Employment Relationship Theory" 67 : 643-, 2012

    2 Elizabeth J. Kennedy, "The Invisible Corner: Expanding Workplace Rights for female day Laborers" 31 : 126-, 2010

    3 Miranda Dietz, "Temporary Workers in California are Twice as Likely as Non-Temps to Live in Poverty: Problems with Temporary and Subcontracted Work in California"

    4 DOL, "Table 3. The 30 Occupations with the Largest Employment Growth, 2006-2016"

    5 Terri Nilliasca, "Some Women’s Work: Domestic Work, Class, Race, Heteropatriarchy, and the Limits of Legal Reform" 16 : 377-410, 2011

    6 Eileen Boris, "Organizing Home Care: Low-Waged Workers in the Welfare State" 34 (34): 81-107, 2006

    7 DOL, "Occupational Employment and Wages Summary §37-2012"

    8 Kevin Shawn Hsu, "Masters and Servants in America: The Ineffectiveness of Current United States Anti-Traffficking Policy in Portecting Victims of Traffcking for the Purpose of Domestic Servitude" 4 : 489-, 2007

    9 Erica C. Morgan, "Invisible Workers: The Exclusion of Domestic Workers from Protective Labor Legislation"

    10 Adam J. Hiller, "Falling Through the Cracks: The Plight of Domestic Workers and Their Continued Search for Legislative Protection" 27 (27): 2009

    1 Elizabeth J. Kennedy, "When the Shop Floor is in the Living Room: Toward a Domestic Employment Relationship Theory" 67 : 643-, 2012

    2 Elizabeth J. Kennedy, "The Invisible Corner: Expanding Workplace Rights for female day Laborers" 31 : 126-, 2010

    3 Miranda Dietz, "Temporary Workers in California are Twice as Likely as Non-Temps to Live in Poverty: Problems with Temporary and Subcontracted Work in California"

    4 DOL, "Table 3. The 30 Occupations with the Largest Employment Growth, 2006-2016"

    5 Terri Nilliasca, "Some Women’s Work: Domestic Work, Class, Race, Heteropatriarchy, and the Limits of Legal Reform" 16 : 377-410, 2011

    6 Eileen Boris, "Organizing Home Care: Low-Waged Workers in the Welfare State" 34 (34): 81-107, 2006

    7 DOL, "Occupational Employment and Wages Summary §37-2012"

    8 Kevin Shawn Hsu, "Masters and Servants in America: The Ineffectiveness of Current United States Anti-Traffficking Policy in Portecting Victims of Traffcking for the Purpose of Domestic Servitude" 4 : 489-, 2007

    9 Erica C. Morgan, "Invisible Workers: The Exclusion of Domestic Workers from Protective Labor Legislation"

    10 Adam J. Hiller, "Falling Through the Cracks: The Plight of Domestic Workers and Their Continued Search for Legislative Protection" 27 (27): 2009

    11 Jeanne M. Phelan, "FLSA Companionship Exemption Changes Struck Down , Healthcare Alert (US) Employment Alert (US)"

    12 Hina Shah, "Domestic Worker Organizing: Building A Contemporary Movement For Dignity and Power" 75 : 413-, 2012

    13 "Application of the FLSA to Domestic Service, 78 FR 60454 (Oct. 1, 2013), codified at 29 C.F.R 552 (“Home Care Worker Regulations”)"

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    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
    2024 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
    2019-01-01 등재 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
    2016-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2012-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2007-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2006-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2005-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2004-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2001-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.09 1.09 0.99
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.89 0.82 1.527 0.28
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼