Recently, discussion of the normal wages are changing legislation theory. On this chance I wanted to make a opportunity to change the system and method of payment of wages complex. However, the reality was different. Because discussion of wage law system Improvements became a place of negotiation to carry through the interests of both labor and management. Purpose of the improvement of legislation originally to simplify the wage system has become colorless. It's a result of discussions on the improvement of the wage system is overlooked that value-neutral. Legislation theory of normal wage system is included a variety of issues. Priority, suggesting to delete the concept of normal wage claim is difficult to agree. Because normal wage has a unique functional and a conceptual significance. Second, there was trying to reduce artificially the four elements of ordinary wages, but this is also difficult to accept. Because four elements of ordinary wages are the basic essentials if concept of normal wage is value valuation of encyclopedic ordinary work. However, the proposal to simplify the meaning of fixed period and dimensions to improve the clarity is possible to take into account legislation on the theory. Third, there is a need to acknowledge the validity of the normal wage agreement between labor and management. The amount of wages is based on the agreement of labor and management basically, it is because not as prescribed by law. Fourth, to define centrally premium rate of normal wages must be improved. The right to decide the upper limit and lower limit, in which, it is to assume that labor and management requirements. And the life of the wage system has made, doing so leads to their advantage the amount of wages, but the respective roles of labor and management. Remains open room for reasonable judgment between labor and management, further, it is necessary not to be used to churning conflict with only a range of concepts normal wage.
Ⅱ. 임금법제도 개편 논의의 의의
Ⅲ. 통상임금을 포함한 임금법제 개선논의의 당위성
Ⅳ. 통상임금에 관한 입법론적 쟁점 1 - ‘통상임금’ 개념을 삭제할 것인가?
Ⅴ. 통상임금에 관한 입법론적 쟁점 2 - ‘통상임금’의 개념정의와 4요소론 간의 관계 논쟁
Ⅵ. 통상임금에 관한 입법론적 쟁점 3 - 통상 근로에 대한 가치평가와 ‘노사 합의’와의 관계
Ⅶ. 통상임금에 관한 입법론적 쟁점 4- 가변적 할증율 도입 필요성