Earticle

초록

영어

ILO human rights standards have assumed a new prominence in recent years in the context of possible linkages between labour standards and the liberalisation of international trade. This has provided a much-needed boost to the standing and relevance of the ILO as it struggles to redefine its role in the post-Cold War environment. Despite its modest overall record in relation to ratification of ILO conventions, Korea has ratified all but one of the seven conventions which constitute the centre-piece of the debate on labour standards and trade. It has also maintained a generally high level of compliance with its obligations under those standards, and in relation to its duty to respect the principles of freedom of association. To some extent, this compliance record may reflect the long-standing policy of successive governments of ratifying conventions only where law and practice are in full compliance, and where all jurisdictions have been prepared to agree to ratification thereby impliedly committing themselves to maintaining compliance with the instrument concerned. However, there is also some reason to suppose that the generally high level of compliance reflects a genuine commitment to the principles embodied in at least the core conventions. As noted earlier, legislative initiatives in the industrial relations area, are routinely checked for conformity with freedom of association standards. Notwithstanding its lukewarm attitude towards the ILO, the Korea government appears to have gone to some lengths to ensure that its reforms to the industrial relations system maintained compliance with Korea's existing commitments-especially in the area of freedom of association. Even if this reflected nothing more noble than a grudging recognition that the legislation might not be passed by the Senate if it exhibited a flagrant disregard for ILO standards, that in itself would tend to confirm the positive impact of ILO human rights standards on law and policy in Korea. Similarly, policy initiatives in relation to issues have been conditioned by a recognised need to ensure continued compliance with the forced labour conventions. In addition, there have also been numerous instances over the years where State and federal governments have introduced legislation to establish compliance, or to ensure continued compliance, with ratified conventions in relation to freedom of association, forced labour and equal opportunity. This seems to bear out the proposition set out in the introduction that these standards have played a markedly effective--if largely unacknowledged--role in protecting fundamental human rights in a country where the Constitution affords little protection (formal or informal) to those rights, and where human rights issues in general conspicuously fail to excite the imagination of either the public or their elected representatives.

목차

ABSTRACT
 I. 公益事業의 勤勞三權
 II. 美國
  1. 公共部門의 範圍
  2. 美國의 爭議行爲의 制限理論
  3. Taft-hartley법상 긴급조정절차
  4. 仲裁節次
  5. 强制仲裁
 III. 日本
  1. 公益事業의 範圍
  2. 禁止制限內容
  3. 勞動爭議節次
 IV. 結論

저자

• 이기한 [ Kihan Lee | 단국대학교 법과대학 교수, 법학박사 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  노동법논총 [The Journal of Labor Law]

• 간기

  연3회

• pISSN

  1229-4314

• 수록기간

  1998~2025

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 336 DDC 363