Earticle

The establishment of the capitalist economic system with a spontaneously organized a union for them against the law or with the employer in relation to national security and protect employee's on the side of three rights came to take an interest. Existence and activities of trade unions to gain legitimacy for the country and to secure independence for the employer was true because more important. But today, even if developed countries as well as the country's employment in accordance with changes in the environment has been the emergence of new employees. In addition, the union's illegal financial operations and decision making structure is the problem. These issues were examined in several aspects to improve. First, the union representing the problem of the representation is limited. Authorized the signing of a collective agreement with representatives of the union, but union representatives only if the abuse occurred and by the terms of the combination should be to limit the rights. Second, is to improve the transparency of financial operations. In order to improve the transparency of financial operations audit shall ensure the independence and professionalism. Finally, the abuses of labor union rights for the supervision and control system should be established. In addition, irregular employees shall endeavor to protect. These efforts for their members, as well as changes in consciousness and commitment is required.

Das Grundrecht der Arbeitsverfassung ist die in Art. 9 III GG verankerte Koalitionsfreiheit. Die Form sichert die Privatautonomie auf kollektiver Ebene. Eine Form kollektiver Beteiligung zur Interessenwahrnehmung enthält die durch Gesetz geschaffene Betriebsverfassung, die für den Bereich des öffentlichen Dienstes durch das Personalvertretungsrecht geregelt ist. Die Mitbestimmungsregelung beruht hier auf Beteiligungsbefugnissen, die von Gesetzes wegen einem durch Wahl demokratisch legitimierten Arbeitnehmerrepräsentanten eingeräumt sind. Außerdem dient der Interessenvertretung die Beteiligung der Arbeitnehmervertreter in der Unternehmensorganisation bestimmter Kapitalgesellschaften und Genossenschaften. Dieser Bereich ist der Sache nach Unternehmensorganisationsrecht, dessen Regelungen das Gesellschaftsrecht enthält. Im deutschen Arbeitsrecht ist zu beachten, dass der Betriebsrat keine Vertretung bestimmter Arbeitnehmergruppen innerhalb des Unternehmens, sondern er repräsentiert die Belegschaft eines Betriebs ist. Das ist also eine entscheidende Unterschied zwischen Betriebsrat und Gewerkschaft. Für die Betriebsrat wird jeder Arbeitnehmer gewält. Deshalb sichert der Betriebsbegriff auch das Prinzip einer einheitlichen Arbeitnehmerrepräsentation innerhalb der Betriebsverfassung. In diesem Rahmen ist es auch zu erwählnen, dass die Maßnahmen des Arbeitskampfes zwischen Arbeitgeber und Betriebsrat unzulässig sind. Dadurch wird die betriebsverfassungsrechtliche Friedenspflicht konkretisiert. Zugleich ist es auch festgelegt, dass die Betriebsverfassung von einem Kooperationsmodell beherrscht wird, also primär auf dem Gedanken des Zusammenwirkens beruht. Das Arbeitskampfverbot ist deshalb Konsequenz der besonderen Ausgestaltung der Mitwirkung und Mitbestimmung des Betriebsrats.

本稿は日本の労働者代表制度に関して過半数代表制度を中心に批判的な接 近を試したものである。 日本の過半数代表制度を中心にする労働者代表制度は、労働条件に関する 労働基準法の規制を排除する機能をもつ労使協定の締結だけでなく、就業規 則などに労働者の意思を確認するなどこの役割を拡大している。しかしなが らこのような機能の拡大に伴うべきである過半数代表制度に対する代表性及 び民主性の確保は必ず十分ではないといえる。 さらに最近日本の労働組合の組織率の低下などを理由にして新しい労働条 件の集団的決定システムとして過半数代表制度を代案として取り入れる動き が見えている。 このような過半数代表制度をめぐる新たな試みは韓国の労働者代表制度に いくつかの示唆点をあたえており、具体的に次のようである。 第一, 日本の過半数代表制度は事業場の全体労働者の過半数支持を得て代 表になるという点から事業場の全体労働者を代表する地位をもっており、こ の点は韓国の労働者代表と同じ地位をもっていると思われる。ただ、この性 格を憲法上の団体であり、労働者の代表である労働組合と同じようにみるこ とは日本の例からわかるようにできないと考えられる。だからむしろこの性 格は法律で定まれた労使協定の締結と労働条件の決定過程で労働者の意思を 確認する範囲で限定しなければならないと思われる。 第に、日本の過半数代表の機能の中一つである労使協定の免罰的効力を認 めるためには、たとえ労働者の労働条件に対して直接的な影響が及ぼされないとしてもこの意 思決定過程に個別労働者の参加が制度的に保障されること が前提条件になれるべきである。なぜならば労使協定の締結が団体協約、就 業規則の前提条件になれる場合があるからである。しだがって韓国の労働者 代表制度においても民主的な労働者代表が選出するための選出手続きの確保 及び様々な状況で労働者の意見を確認できる最小限の手続きは必要であると 思われる。

Unfair treatment of employee on grounds that he or she has joined or intends to join a labor union, or has attempted to organize a labor union, or has performed any other lawful act for the operation of a labor union by employer must be prohibited in order to secure the basic rights of the employees. An employee or labor union may apply for remedy to the Labor Relations Commission upon infringement of rights due to unfair labor practices on the part of the employer. In order to determine whether the concerned treatment of employee constitutes an act of unfair labor practice, it is necessary to be proved an employer's intention of unfair labor practice by employee or labor union. Employee or a labor union should give the Labor Relations Commission an evidence as a presumtive proof of unfair labor practice. In fact it is difficult to be proved an employer's intention of unfair labor practice because workers can not easily get information of the company. Labor Relations Commission often encounter an obstacle to determine employer's unfair labor practice because of the procedure of the burden of proof by workers. Therefore it is necessary to be changed the principle of the burden of proof in unfair labor practice. The burden-shifting rules is needed to lighten to prove an employer's intention of unfair labor practice. Moreover unfair labor practices by employers of this year are estimated to be increased because Korean government introduced the plural union system in same company on July 1, 2011 to gurantee the right to organize which Constitution Law gurantee. Employers has to bargain in good faith all labor unions and treat them partially. If the employer not to keep neutral attitude, the action of the employer will be unfair labor practice.

Seit dem 01.07.2011 kann man auch in einem Betrieb mehrere Gewerkschaften gründen, also die Gewerkschaftspluralität im Betrieb ist seitdem nun erlaubt. Aber Angst und Sorge sind eine Realität.: die Zersplitterung der einheitlichen Gewerkschaft, der Wettbewerb zwischen den Gewerkschaften im Betrieb, der unabsehbare Zuwachs der Kosten in den Tarifverhandlungen und letztlich nun die Zerstörung des Systems zu einheitlichen Arbeitsbedingungen. Allerdings hat man mit der Einführung der Gewerkschaftspluralität im Betrieb auch zur Verhinderung von der Gefahr der Störung des Betriebsfriedens und der Vereinheitlichung der Arbeitsbedingungen die Vereinheitlichung der Gewerkschaftspluralität bei der betrieblichen Tarifverhandlung eingeführt. Danach sollen Gewerkschaften im Betrieb eine repräsentative Gewerkschaft bei den betrieblichen Tarifverhandlungen auswählen. Zum Betriebsfrieden und zur Vereinheitlichung der Arbeitsbedingungen im Betrieb ist das Verfahren erforderlich und verhältnismäßig, aber zur Verhinderung der zahlreichen Ausbruchs der Minigewerkschaften im Betrieb nicht genügend. Deswegen sollte anderer Weg gesucht werden. Vor allem kann man an der Beschränkung der Koalitionsfreiheit der Minigewerkschaften denken. Eine Gewerkschaft sollte im Betrieb nur dann gegründet werden, wenn sie bestimmte Mitglieder, etwa 10~20 Personen, bzw. bestimmtes Prozent der Belegschaft, etwa 10~20% der Belegschaft, bekommen kann. Dies ist erforderlich und verhältnismäßig, so lange die Minigewerkschaften das Betriebsfrieden und die Vereinheitlichung der Arbeitsbedingungen erheblich stören würden. Wenn auch der Begriff der Gewerkschaft auf dieser Weise reformiert wird, ist das nach der Ansicht des Verfassers verfassungsmäßig, weil solche Reform nicht eine Verletzung der Koalitionsfreiheit, sondern eine Ausgestaltung der Koalitionsfreiheit.

Korean society has faced much social and educational problems from foreign workers and migrant wives, because korean society has remained as a single race country for long time and has very few historic experiences to treat foreigners fairly and reasonably. So the german policy of foreign workers is very meaningfull in solving social conflicts in korean society. The hint of german policy of foreign workers are as follows. First. we must change the viewpoint of foreign workers. Foreign workers in Korea are evaluated very lowly compared with their roles. Now their role must be newly lighted on korean economy, because middle sized companies can not be operated without their labour forces. Foreign workers are indipensable in contemprary and future period, because birth rate will decrease so sharply year by year. Foreign workers must be considered as basic human resources of korean economy. Secondly, “Encouragement Law for Multi-Culture Family(ELMC)” was enacted in year of 2010. But this law focus on only supporting for the multi-cultural families. It does not regulate whole governance of realisation of multi culturism in korean society. The problemes of migrant wives and foreign workers can not be solved only by economical aid, but by whole social systems. German policy focus on the social intergration of migrant workers, migrant families and their children Third, policies of foreign workers must be changed from recruitment of low skilled man powers to employment of professionals. German and other developed governments give an many incentives to the foreign professionals by inviting them in their own countries. The examples of incentives are exemption of employment visa issue or quota control of nummbers of employees. issuing of permanent residential visa. Now korean government must introduce permanent visa for the high skilled foreign workers Forth. illegal workers must have some opportunities to be legalized under some conditions. Most of developed countries give them legal status occasionally. German government support illegal workers air fares and tuition fees of job creation in their borned countries. In any cases, illegal worker can not be avoided in the all of the world, because they can not have chances in their own countries. Korean employers want also to employ them so long, because they can become high skilled workers in few years, and they are so productive comparing with new comers. Now government must consider to invite foreign workers with their families and give them permanent residential visa, if they have high skilled technology and their employers agree to employ in long term. Finally, the policy of foreign workers must be changed from the economic view point. Foreign workers should find their vision in Korea and have success story. They have human rights and must be protected by labour laws. They deserve respect for their role and royalty to the companies. If companies need them, korean government must give them rights to work in Korea.

In the case of the subcontract within a company, the wage differentials exist between the original contract workers and the infra-subcontract workers who are performing the same work at the field of the original contractor. The proper and effective regulation is not imposed on the wage discrimination against the infra-subcontract workers for the reasons of that the Act on the Protection, etc, of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Employees and Act on the Protection, etc, of Dispatched Workers are not applied to the infra-subcontract workers. In the case of subcontract within a company, for the reasons of that the infra-subcontract workers are performing the same work at the field of the original contractor by using equipment, facilities, tools, etc of the original contractor, the equal remuneration for work of equal value on the basis of the constitutional equal rights should be applied to them. Although Labor Standards Act, National Human Rights Commission Act, Minimum Wage Act, Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act, Act on the Promotion of Collaborative Cooperation between Large Enterprises and Small-Medium Enterprises as the current laws related to the wage differentials are in existence today, it seems to be insufficient to effectively regulate the wage differentials in the current law system due to their own limitations. To eliminate the wage differentials between the original contract workers and the infra-subcontract workers, legislation improvement as the joint responsibility for the wage differentials of the infra-subcontract workers, the extension of the concept of the employer, to enact a general law against discrimination, to disclose the wage information, etc seems to be needed.

In the early 1990s, as the recession initiated by the bursting of the Japanese asset price bubble became protracted, Japanese companies started to abandon the particularly “Japanese” form of management that they had formerly employed and look for new management methods. As a part of such new operative strategies, companies employed more temporary workers and increased outsourcing, which radically increased their use of external employees. As a result, the problem of temporary workers, the breadth and seriousness of which greatly increased throughout the so-called Lost Decade following the asset price collapse and the Koizumi administration’s structural reforms, cast a deep shadow over Japan’s society and its economy. Since the late 2000s, scholars have pointed to the rapid increase of temporary workers as contributing to the exacerbation of the problems of the “gap society” and the “working poor.” Scholars see more temporary workers as contributing to the gap society and the working poor because this class is exposed to substandard working conditions, including compensation that typically does not rise greatly above the minimum wage level. While temporary workers themselves could theoretically seek to improve their working conditions through collective action, such a solution is not realistic in light of the low level of labor union membership in this class. Thus, governmental intervention is crucial to solving the wage problem for temporary workers. Several proposals have been expounded for solving this problem through legal policy means: expanding social security coverage, educating temporary workers to increase their ability to meaningfully contribute to the company, and raising minimum wage. These policies should be implemented in tandem in order to produce the optimal result, but the most direct solution is raising the minimum wage. Article 9 of Japan’s Minimum Wage Act says that regional minimum wages must be determined taking into consideration “the cost of living and the wages of workers and the capacity of normal industries to pay wages in the region.” Thus, the cost of living is a factor to be taken into account in setting the minimum wage. However, minimum wageamounts as heretofore established have not been enough to cover even the most basic cost of living, which is why laborunions have continuously called for a minimum wage that is “at least enough to allow the recipient to enjoy the most basic health and cultural benefits.” Such demands are broadly called the “living wage” movement. However, despite a noticeable increase made during the last 5years as a result of the movement, the minimum wage still does not match the basic cost of living necessary for maintaining humandignity. As the governmental policy of meeting the basic cost of living by raising the minimum wage failed to produce a meaningful result, labor unions began to search for a new solution at the local level, called the “public contracts ordinance enactment” movement. Public contracts ordinance refers to the local ordinance that requires private contractors who are awarded governmental construction projects or obtain a contract in open bidding to pay a higher wage than the minimum wage to the employees working on such projects. In the 1990s, labor unions have actively developed a movement to implement this ordinance, and such movement started to produce tangible results by the 2000s. This study attempts to examine the change in Japanese labor movement since the 1990s and the local communities’ response to the movement by looking at the background, the significance, the process and the results of such movement through case studies from Noda, Chiba and Kawasaki, Kanakawa.

Le système légal en vigueur concernant le harcèlement moral au travail a été institué par la loi de modernisation sociale en date du 17 janvier 2002. La loi de modernisation sociale a légalement reconnu le concept de harcèlement moral et a introduit le système légal pour combattre le harcèlement moral. Concernant harcèlement moral per se, la loi de modernisation sociale a institué le cadre légal basé sur la insertion dans le code du travail de la définition et des dispositions spéciales pour combattre le harcèlement moral. Il n'y ait pas des dispositions spécifiques antérieurement pour régler le phénomène de harcèlement moral au travail. En ce temps-là, la cour a ordonné des affaires civiles correspondant aux phénomènes de harcèlement moral au travail par l'application de principe de droit civil ainsi que les conventions doivent être exécutées de bonne foi, le principe de la dignité humaine ou la obligation générale de prévention de l'employeur relative à la sécurité et à la santé au travail. Depuis la loi de modernisation sociale, il y a beaucoup de arrêts concernants cette loi. Cette étude examine particulièrement la loi et arrêts concernants la définition de harcèlement moral et le responsabilité civile pour l'agissements de harcèlement moral. Le caractère essentiel du régime juridique de harcèlement moral en France est le suivant. Au civil, les décisions sur le harcèlement moral ne se fondent pas nécessairement sur la volonté de nuire. Le harcèlement moral est constitué indépendamment de l'intention de son auteur dès lors que sont caractérisés des agissements répétés ayant pour effet une dégradation des conditions de travail susceptible de porter atteinte aux droits et à la dignité du salarié, d'altérer sa santé ou de compromettre son avenir professionnel. Cette approche large de la qualification de harcèlement moral condamne certaines méthodes de gestion mises en oeuvre par un supérieur hiérarchique, losqu'elles se manifestent, pour un salarié, par des agissements constitutifs d'un harcèlement moral. L'employeur doit protéger la santé tant physique que mentale du salarié. S'agissant d'une obligation de sécurité de résultat, l'absence de faute n'exonère pas l'employeur de sa responsabilité. Ainsi, l'employeur ne doit pas se contenter de prendre des mesures en vue de faire cesser les agissements de harcèlement. Il doit empêcher leur survenance même.

The Employment Permit System(EPS) has been designed in accordance with the following principles: guarantee employment opportunities for domestic workers; assure companies' rights to select employees; ensure transparency in selecting and introducing foreign workers; prevent the settling down of foreign workers; protect the rights of foreign workers; guarantee foreign workers' legal employment while preventing illegal sojourn and interruption of restructuring. The EPS carries great significance because with the implementation of the system, the issue of foreign workers employment became the domain of labor market policies instead of the realm of immigration. However, the ｢Act on Foreign Workers' Employment, etc.｣ has undergone technical revisions in order to make it easier for companies to hire foreign workers, and this has affected the principles of the EPS, requiring it to change. Since the Korean society is rapidly aging, the shortage in skilled workforce will become more severe. In this regard, the EPS should seek a structural change with a future oriented vision. Such changes should include guaranteeing the freedom to change workplaces, granting permanent residency, introducing a system to eliminate discrimination, expanding the participation of the public in making policy decisions, establishing a comprehensive foreign workforce policy that covers professionals, and implementing a policy to separate labor inspection from immigration administration.