Labor Minister Kim Young-hoon said on Wednesday, regarding the death of a Cargo Truckers Solidarity Union (Cargo Union) member at the CU logistics center in Jinju, South Gyeongsang Province, that "there are precedents holding that truck drivers, as specially employed workers, should be regarded as a labor union if they are in a relationship of economic dependence in substance, even if they take the form of self-employed operators." The previous day, when asked by The Seoul Economic Daily whether the Cargo Union qualifies as a labor union, he answered that it was "a labor union's struggle." Earlier, on the 20th, the Ministry of Employment and Labor drew a line regarding the Cargo Union's demand for negotiations with BGF, the operator of CU convenience stores, stating that "the situation goes beyond the issue of prime-subcontractor negotiations under Article 2 of the revised Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (commonly known as the Yellow Envelope Law)." This government position has now been overturned within two or three days by Minister Kim's remarks, creating confusion.
In June last year, the Seoul Central District Court recognized the "worker status" of Cargo Union members, ruling that "their high degree of labor market dependence qualifies them as workers." The court also partially recognized "employer status." However, even if they are workers, they must file a labor union establishment report with the authorities to be recognized as a legal labor union. The Cargo Union did not go through this process and instead joined as an organization under the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions' Korean Public Service and Transport Workers' Union. It also engaged in unilateral collective action without following the negotiation and labor dispute procedures required under the Trade Union Act. This is why the Labor Ministry has had no choice but to maintain that it is "difficult to recognize it as a labor union under the Trade Union Act."
The recent death is deeply tragic and must never recur. However, it is inappropriate for the minister in charge to overturn the government's consistently maintained position without deliberative procedures such as public hearings. Minister Kim's unilateral interpretation is expected to trigger a surge of direct negotiation demands from specially employed workers. Minister Kim argued that behind this accident, "the dialogue (requested by the Cargo Union) was rejected, and the company also filed damages claims, worsening the situation." But the essence of the problem is that the Yellow Envelope Law itself was hastily drafted, leaving its provisions ambiguous. As a result, as seen in the Cargo Union case, disputes over the scope of employers and workers continue unabated at industrial sites. The Labor Ministry must not turn a blind eye to the side effects of the Yellow Envelope Law, and should listen to the views of the business community to urgently prepare supplementary measures. The later these measures come, the greater the confusion will grow over the already tangled issue of specially employed workers.
