Earticle

No one can deny the fact that dismissal protection legal principles is an important area of labor law system. As long as the law and the case is not changed, effort to strengthen or weaken is meaningless. More than anything, the systematization of basic principles for dismissal also appear to need. Proportionality principle or last resort principle of dismissal has been built to a precedent legal principles. however, the need to be a variety of realistic dismissal legislation system are appeared. I think that a realistic goal considered in improving the dismissal law is something else. The first is to correct the nature of the dismissal system. The dismissal system forever can not be put in the area of the disciplinary system. Secondly, in relation to the dismissal relief systems, to enhance their effectiveness and to increase the accessibility to legal parties. Because, minimizing the consumption dispute is also to reduce the social burden. In the course of the reorganization of the German dismissal legal system, these points have been emphasized, it is seen as largely to suggest to us. Germany has taken a single legal systems related to dismissal. By providing a relatively diverse system, It planned detailed clarity. However, regulations on the current Labor Standards Act related dismissal does not reflect the structure of validity judgment and attribute and procedure of the various legal systems. Dismissal legal system is not dependent on the labor operational custom. This is intended to mean that they neglect a variety of legal disputes that it can come from dismissal, further overlooked that even how such conflict induces. There is a need to actualization and specialization of standard that improving predictability on Judicial outcome related dismissal. As a result, it is important that the dismissal norms operate substantially in labor and management both. Users should realize that they should comply with the provisions on the dismissal legal system, workers also easily make a conclusion about what kind of legal action that are possible in relation to the dismissal performed. Advancement of the dismissal system is not relaxation and strengthening of dismissal law, It must be focused on concentrate that dismissal institutional system to work effectively from the reality of the labor.

Currently in Korea, the labor unions organized independently in a company have changed their organization form into the branch of industrial union. While the company union is regarded as an independent legal union under the Korea labor law, the branch of industrial union is not an legal union. Accordingly, many questions has arisen as to the Constitutional and legal right of the branch of industrial union. First of all, a question was put to court as to whether branch of industrial union has the right to decide on seceding from industrial union. secondly, the issue is as to whether the branch of industrial union has the right of collective bargaining without direction or control of industrial union. Some argue that the brach cannot secede from the industrial union and bargain collectively with company without approval of industrial union, because the branch of industrial unions not an independent legal union and that only industrial union, legal union, can do that. The Supreme Court in Korea has rendered the decision that the branch of industrial union has the right to secede from the industrial union based in its independent decision and to bargain collectively with company without the direction or control of industrial union so long as the branch has formed a organizational entity. I fully agree with the Court decision in the effect that the branch of industrial union is given the independent right to organize the union, secede from the industrial union, right to bargain collective, and engage in concerted activity because the branch has the Constitutional fundamental right of union activities.

Even though the Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers Act has been enforced for almost ten years, it is doubtful about the achievement of its original purpose of legislation. Currently, the issue of non-regular workers is socially more emphasized. On top of fixed-term workers, especially in case of part-time workers belonging to the representative non-regular workers, most of them are working for part-time job to make money as they cannot get full-time job. Actually, the number and rate of them are increasing every year. Also, recently, there are more and more people who want part-time job for diverse reasons like study, childcare, employment preparation, retirement preparation, and personal leisure life. However, the social interest and necessity to protect them have been relatively neglected compared to fixed-term workers. The current laws or institutions do not include satisfactory measures to improve part-time workers' employment instability and poor conditions of employment. The concept of part-time worker has not been even clearly established yet. Also, the current system does not fully guarantee the opportunity of part-time workers desiring for full-time job, and also full-time workers who like to change to part-time job due to personal reasons. Moreover, it would be necessary to reexamine many issues such as the irrational and limited application of all sorts of employment conditions like wage compared to part-time workers' working hours under the current laws, and also the fact that all sorts of legislative regulations about part-time workers including their overtime and conditions of employment which could be the most important part of conditions of employment related to part-time job are divided into several laws. Thus, this study aims to examine part-time workers' poor conditions of employment by getting out of the existing viewpoint focusing on the protection of fixed-term workers, and also to reexamine the problems and improvement measures of the protection system for part-time workers under the current Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers Act.

This paper is intended to introduce some legal issues regarding the outsourcing of labor by local governments. The Japanese government has vigorously pursued many national policies concerning outsourcing since the 1980s with a marked trend toward neo-liberalism. With the known financial issues that arrive from outsourcing, local governments need to be cognizant of the legal problems that outsourcing creates when used on public projects from the prospective of both administrative and labor law. Conclusions are as follows: First, outsourcing produces many non-regular workers. When public services are contracted out, the working conditions of these employment contracts, such as worker’s healthcare compensation, generally decrease. Special policies are required to address the needs of the “working poor” in regards to the outsourcing of labor. Second, the outsourcing policy of the central government may come into conflict with the autonomy of the local government. Third, outsourcing creates problems regarding camouflage contracts or an unlawfully dispatched work. Forth, it is important that when the local government contracts out public services, the supervisory responsibility for those services remain inside government jurisdiction. In some cases, a public officer or the local government may need to have a criminal or a civil responsibility for this supervisory duty. Finally, where a local government establishes a company with private capital for the construction or facility management of a public facility, the government generally vouches for damages that come to the private capital side. In this case, an official in the local government may take a civil responsibility for the oversight of this outsourcing.

The classic carcinogens continue to play a significant role. These include asbestos, benzene, various metals (chromium, nickel, arsenic). Cancer cases represent a growing part of occupational diseases in Korea during the last 10 years. The growing number of occupational cancers is caused by former exposure to benzen. In particular, I would today the most important cancer risk include benzene in the workplace. The benzene content in gasoline must be decrease for health protection of worker, otherwise occupation safety and health acts must be applied, for health prevention for worker. Because of lack of occupation safety and health would have meant that workers often seriously ill, such as leukemia, lymphatic cancer or multiple sclerosis. Cancers by Benzene have a very special role in public perception. The cause of death is cancer of the blood responsible in Korea. The social insurance act must be an occupational disease as an insurance case, acknowledge, provided they present certain conditions. These act have given the historical origin of protection against occupational disease. This also cancers can be recognized an occupational disease by benzene, even if they have not found acceptance into the list of Berufskrankheiten. However, it must precede the detection of the individual probability of evidence of general security of the causal connection.

Proportionality review criteria and prohibition of arbitrariness principle, the main criteria for discrimination, are available in the adjudication on constitutionality of laws related with the violation of equal rights. These two standards are in great use in the area of the employment-related acts to judge the violation of the prohibited discrimination, especially have great meaning in deciding whether certain disadvantages in employment are the discrimination or not. These evaluation standards on discrimination which mainly have been discussed in US and German affected the formation of Korean standards, therefore evaluation standards of Korea have much similarity with those of US and German. Proportionality review criteria as the criterion for judging employment discrimination is applied in two cases : when the constitution prohibits the unequal treatment itself and when the unequal treatment brings violations of other basic rights. Detailed criteria include the rationality and the unavoidability of discrimination, the appropriateness of methods and procedures, and the balance of the private benefit with public benefit. On the other hand, prohibition of arbitrariness principle allows the enough discretion of the legislator. If the rationality of the discriminatory law or act is acknowledged, that law or act can be justified. Eventually, the main role of the criterion for judging employment discrimination is to measure the rational reasons. Discriminatory acts which have rational ground are not concerned as a discrimination. An Actual discriminations also is not regarded as a discrimination when it has the aims to solve the discriminatory situation and to ensure the equality.