초록 열기/닫기 버튼
Supreme court states, “Works rules are drawn up by employers based on corporate management rights to uniformly establish standards for workers' service discipline and working conditions at the workplace. This is because the Labor Standards Act is based on the reality of dependent labor relations and provides for the management of substantially unequal workers. It should be seen that its creation was forced and legal norms were given to it as part of the purpose of protecting and improving their basic lives by strengthening the protection of the position.” However, from the perspective of worker protection and equal determination of working conditions, it is still unclear how works rules unilaterally drawn up by the employer protect and strengthen the unequal position of workers in the reality of dependent labor relations. To understand this, it is necessary to review discussions in Europe and Japan in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when the works rule system was first formed. Looking at the formation and development process of the works rule system in Europe and Japan, which are the prototypes of our works rule system, the works rule system was developed in Europe during the emergence of large factories during the Industrial Revolution, when economically superior employers decided on labor regulations and working conditions. They began to write it, but due to the lack of legal regulations on its contents and writing procedures, workers had no choice but to unilaterally be subject to the harsh works rules. Accordingly, the German Business Act of 1891 institutionally accepted works rules and gave employers the obligation to prepare and report works rules, including statutory information, while regulating the preparation process and recognizing legal binding force, which became the beginning of the works rules system. In addition, countries such as France and Belgium also attempted to regulate works rules as a system, and these legislative examples had a great influence on Korean legislation through Japan's 1926 Factory Act Enforcement Decree and the 1947 works rules system under the Labor Standards Act. As a result of a comparative and historical review of the works rule system, the early works rules that emerged along with factory labor functioned as a means of exercising arbitrary authority of the employer, but each country's labor legislation mandates its preparation and transmits its contents to workers. It was confirmed that an attempt was made to protect workers by clearly informing workers and establishing a series of ‘systems’ that allow the state to intervene in the contents. However, it was confirmed that its normative legitimacy and consistency were weak in that although debates had been going on since the late 19th century in Germany to clarify its legal nature, no theory ultimately gained the upper hand. In addition, in Europe after World War II, as labor legislation was reorganized and labor contracts and collective agreement legislation developed, the guardianship protection of the state and employers through the works rule system was transformed into a system for determining working conditions based on ‘agreement’. And in the case of Japan, it was found that efforts were made to secure rationality and clarity in operation while maintaining the system for determining working conditions through the works rule system. This suggests that when reviewing ways to improve the works rule system in the future, it is necessary to review the direction of improvement of the worker representative system with the principle of equal determination of collective working conditions as the basic direction.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
Works rule, Discipline, Worker's representation, Working condition
