Earticle

본 발제에서는 우리나라 직업성 근골격계질환의 발생과 관리에 영향을 미치는 요인들 중에서 사회적 그리고 법적 함의를 갖는 요인들을 정리하고자 한다. 일반적으로 질병의 발생과 그 관리가 단순한 방식으로 혹은 어느 한 가지 요인에 의하여 결정되거나 영향을 받는 것이 아니라, 사회 문화적 배경을 포함한 여러 가지 요인들이 서로 작용하는 과정에서 다각도로 영향을 받기 때문에, 직업성 근골격계질환 또한 주요한 사회적 법적 요인들에 영향을 받고 있으며, 본 발제는 이러한 요인들의 영향을 체계화하여 살펴보고자 한다. 첫 번째로 우리사회의 직업성 근골격계 질환의 규모와 성격에 대하여 살펴본 다음, 이러한 근골격계질환이 지난 몇 년 간에 걸쳐서 실제 우리사회에서 진단되고 관리되는 양상을 살펴보도록 한다. 이를 통하여 우리사회에서 좀 더 장기간에 걸쳐서 근골격계 질환의 진단과 관리에 영향을 미치는 보다 근본적인 사회적, 법적 요인들과 좀 더 단기간에 걸쳐 영향을 미치는 요인들이 직업성 근골격계 질환의 진단과 관리에 영향을 미치는 양상을 전반적으로 살펴보고자 한다. 두 번째로 직업병의 진단은 그 관리를 위하여 이루어지기 때문에 어떠한 요인들이 실제 직업병 진단근거 혹은 진단 상의 논리에 영향을 미치는지를 살펴보고자 한다. 특히 직업성 근골격계 질환의 진단과 관리에 영향을 미치는 요인들을 살펴보고, 그 중에서 사회적 법적 함의를 갖는 요인들을 구분하여 살펴보고자 한다.

This study is to examine legal and social issues in the development and control of occupational musculoskeletal diseases in Korea. Disease causation and its control is affected by multiple factors including socio-cultural backgrounds in complex ways, and occupational musculoskeletal diseases have been affected by several socio-legal issues recently. Systematic survey of these issues is needed. In the first place, the trends in the magnitude and content of occupational musculoskeletal diseases over the last decade will be examined together with the changes in the diagnostic and control programs. Long-term and more fundamental changes including social and legal ones will be delineated together with short-term ones in the diagnosis and management of occupational musculoskeletal diseases. In the second place, as the diagnosis of occupational disease is to manage its development and progression, the underlying factors in the logic and rationale of diagnosis of occupational diseases in general will be examined, and those one for the occupational musuloskeletal diseases will be more scrutinized.

The Work-related musculoskeletal disorders(MSDs) are a serious, pervasive problem throughout whole workplaces. The U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (1995) has reported that in one year there were 705,800 cases of days away from work that resulted from overexertion or pain from repetitive motion. Estimated costs associated with lost days and compensation claims related to musculoskeletal disorders range from $13 to $20 billion annually. In Korea a total of 7,723 workers were suffering MSDs in 2007. The figure shows 73.9% of the total victims of indusrial accidents and diseases excluding deaths. The injuries related to overexertion or repetitive motion are potentially disabling and can require long recovery periods. For example, workers need an average of 28 days to recuperate from carpal tunnel syndrome-more time than necessary for amputations or fractures. The real solutions exist that can spare workers pain and pare expenses for their employers. It's time we began putting those solutions to work for everyone's benefit. No worker should take a job to earn a living only to return home disabled. And no employer should have to bear the expense associated with injuries that can be prevented. The Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency(KOSHA) has found substantial evidence that ergonomics programs can cut workers' compensation costs, increase productivity and decrease employee turnover. In fact, ergonomics began as an effort to streamline work processes and improve efficiency to save money. In short, good ergonomics is good economics. The WISHA expects a 40-percent reduction in work-related MSDs through its new standard. This is based on research indicating that the lower the intensity, duration and frequency of exposure to physical risk factors at work, the lower the risk a worker will develop an MSD. Therefore, reducing the weight of objects workers must lift, limiting the time workers must work in awkward postures or cutting the number of repetitive motions workers must perform should reduce injuries. Evidence presented in comments to us and at the OSHA hearing indicated this is a promising approach. The OSHA's experience has shown that workers may be reluctant to report problems early if doing so will cause them to miss work and lose pay. We must find a way to reassure employees that they won't be penalized for reporting injuries. This is particularly a problem for workers at smaller businesses, which often do not provide sick time. While ergonomics relies on a scientific approach to fit the job to the worker, it isn't necessarily exact. Sometimes it requires experimentation. But every safety and health professional can identify solutions that eliminate musculoskeletal disorders that result from a mismatch between the job and the worker. However, it is regrettable, that the KOSHA CODE H-5-1998, which gave a guideline for the weight of objects workers must lift, was repealed in 2007. The Code suggested that the male workers should not be allowed to lift more than 40% and the female workers not more than 24% of his/her own weight. The measure was taken in the process of deregulation of the business. We have to differentiate the fields where regulation should be eased and where regulation should be tightened. Concerned with the safety and health of the workers, the tightening of the regulation would be rather considerable.

Yielding the effectiveness of occupational accident prevention becomes difficult unless the responsibility of prevention mechanism is fully recognized by the employer and the employers are prominently educated on this matter. Article 32 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act states about the employers’ education, and with the amendment of Law No. 4220 on January 13, 1990, employers’ job education regulation was established. With the amendment in December 1996, Article 38 of the Ministerial Decree with the objective of reducing incidents was stipulated from “management inspector who manages and inspects the tasks that were involved in occupational accident appointed by the Minister of Labor” to “employers of the enterprises with more than 2 work-related casualties per year.” However, since there were some problems relating to the contents of the employers’ education system and only the large companies were covered for the serious accidents, the effectiveness of the act was questioned. Thus with the latest amendment of the OSHA, employers and management inspectors’ education mentioned in Article 32 of the OSHA was abolished. The primary factor for recently plateaued accident rate could be singled out to political errors of occupational prevention projects, but it is in fact the lack of employers’ consciousness and recognition conversion, although in ideal theory, employers should be fully responsible for the workplace safety and health prevention measures.

This study was planned to investigate the organizational and institutional mechanism of production and maintenance of vulnerable workers. Specifically vulnerability of occupational injuries and illnesses may be induced by risk transfer that is one of the strategies of economic organization to make profit maximize. The most economic activities can be accompanied by risk because that risk taking can produce benefit. Expected benefit of firm also can produce loss. But every firm should make account of benefit and loss so that he try to make reduction of expected loss. These trying to make reduction of loss can be emerged as risk transfer in order to make benefit maximize and loss minimize. In Korea firms at the time of financial crisis 1988 tried to make reengineering and downsizing as economic rationalization in order to make production cost reduction. Some parts of production process were transferred to other firms based on contract with risk transfer. Vulnerable workers to occupational injuries and illnesses were continuously produced and maintained by every firm based on motivation of profit making. These process also supported by cultural, organizational and institutional bases as social inequality for example sex segregation in the field of employment, etc. The strategies for protection of vulnerable workers may be focused on organizational , social and cultural aspects based on social security system.

1)　労働災害に対する補償制度(韓国における産業災害保険制度)は、労働法が生まれてから存在する古典的な分野の一つである。韓国では、勤労基準法の定める使用者の災害補償責任の責任保険として出発し、今日においては、「通勤災害」を含め、労働者の業務関連事故を幅広く含む産業災害補償保険(日本の労働災害保険)として社会に定着しつつある。 2)　ちなみに、日本においても、戦後、労働基準法の定める使用者の災害補償責任の責任保険として出発し、同様の趨勢であることが分かる。最近では、労働災害(労災)、または職業病(業務上の疾病)の問題は、被害の発生が明らかになった際に、時事的な話題を呼んでいる上、その民事⋅刑事責任の可否、その追及または労災保険給付の支給可否という側面からよく言及されている。 3)　従って、本稿においては、日本にとって労働法学の分野が関心を有している労災保険法⋅制度に対し、① 労災保険制度の目的⋅必要性、②　労災保険料、③　労災保険給付の水準、④　労災保険の事業主体、というそれぞれの基本問題を中心とし、労災保険制度の沿革、比較法、判例を含めた法解釈、最近の制度改革と関連した議論を、多様な観点から法学の立場として見てきた。そして、今後韓国の場合も同様で、日本の場合にも労災保険に対し、経済学の分析を深化させ、法学と経済学の実のある話し合いを通じた、より優れた労災保険制度の実現の必要な分野であることが問題として提起されている。

この論文は、‘債務者の回生と破産に關する法律’(以下、‘債務者回生法’ または ‘回生法’とする）の破産手続きを進行している企業の労働者を解雇する場合、提起される二つの問題に關するものである。 まずは、その企業の労働者を解雇する時、適用される根據法律、あるいは解雇の法的性質の問題で、その企業の労働者を解雇する場合にも、一般の企業とおなじく、勤労基準法（以下には、‘勤基法’とする）の要件を適用するのか、あるいは勤基法の要件を適用しないで、民法の規定を適用するのかに關して學說が分かれている。便宜上、前者を‘勤基法の整理解雇說’というし、後者を‘民法の雇用契約解止說’という。 次は、具体的に何の要件が必要かという問題が提起される。卽、破産手続きを進行している企業の場合は、皆当然の解雇事由に当たるので、個別的や具体的に檢討しないで、その手続きの進行中という事實だけで労働者を解雇するに充分だと解する見解と、その企業の場合にも一応、整理解雇をする経営の緊迫性は認定されるが、具体的な緊迫性の强度とそれに相応する解雇の範圍等に關する、個別事案別に具体的に檢討して正當性を判斷しなければならないし、解雇者の各各に個別的な正當性の要件が充足されなければならないと解する見解に分れている。便宜上、前者を‘当然解雇事由說’というし、後者を‘個別的検討說’という。 筆者は、この問題に關しては、‘勤基法の整理解雇說’が正しいと考える。勤基法にかかわらず、民法の規定にそって、破産管材人が勤勞契約も解止できると解する‘民法の当然解雇事由說’は、論理的に矛盾だと思われる。 そして、破産手続きを進行している企業の場合は、労働者を解雇する為に何の要件が必要かという問題である。この点に関すると、当然の解雇事由に当たるので、個別的や具体的に檢討しないで、その破産手続きが進行されているという事實だけで労働者を解雇するに充分だと解する見解は、正しくないと思われる。勿論、破産手続きを進行されているという事實が、整理解雇をする経営の緊迫性は認定されるが、具体的な緊迫性の强度とそれに相応する解雇の範圍等に關する、個別事案別に具体的に檢討して正當性を判斷しなければならないし、解雇者の各各に個別的な正當性の要件が充足されなければならないと解するべきである。勤基法の‘解雇の正當性’の本來趣旨は、解雇者各自に要求されるものだから、大勢の人を整理解雇する場合にも、整理解雇対象者の全てに解雇の正當性が必要である。従って、破産手続きを進行すると經営の緊迫性が存在し、經営の緊迫性が存在すれば、解雇者の範囲に關しては、特別な考慮をしない‘当然解雇事由說’は、妥當ではないし、經営の緊迫性の大きさと整理解雇の大きさを比較した上で相互の衡平性が存在しなければならないと解する‘個別的検討說’が正しいと思われる。