본문 바로가기

추천 검색어

실시간 인기 검색어

학술논문

부당노동행위에 있어 지배·개입 의사에 관한 일고

이용수 160

영문명
Some Considerations on Intention of Domination and Intervention in Unfair Labor Practice
발행기관
충북대학교 법학연구소
저자명
이재목(Lee, Jae Mok)
간행물 정보
『법학연구』第28卷 第2號, 143~162쪽, 전체 20쪽
주제분류
법학 > 법학
파일형태
PDF
발행일자
2017.12.30
5,200

구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.

1:1 문의
논문 표지

국문 초록

영문 초록

2011. 7. 1. Since the establishment of plural unions is legally permitted, unfair labor practices related to domination or intervention have been widening from the establishment of labor unions to the stage of unification of bargaining windows, and the stage of collective bargaining and collective agreement. According to the white paper on employment labor published in 2017, an average of 9.2 percent of cases in which a relief order was filed against the Labor Relations Commission for unfair labor practices during the past three years. It is difficult to deny that the relief rate is too low, although there may be a tendency for the relief application to be overshadowed by the intensified conflicts between labor unions and employers. The unfair labor practice of domination or intervention prescribed in Article 81 (4) of the Labor Union and Labor Relations Act has had a conflict of view over the necessity of the intention domination or intervention and the burden of proof thereof. In Korea, judicial precedent is in the position that intention of dominance or intervention are necessary, and the doctrine is in conflict with the position that a intention is necessary and the position that it is not. However, there is no big difference in the opinion that the case does not require the intention because the indirect fact actually presumes the intention of domination or intervention and recognizes the unfair labor practice by domination or intervention unless there is no disprove of the employer. The distribution of the burden of proof is the key to deciding whether or not to cite an unfair labor practice relief application by domination or intervention. The judicial precedent presumes the intention of dominance or intervention through indirect evidence that dominance or intervention exists, and is given the opportunity to be fined through proof of the user s objection. The distribution structure of such proofs is considered to be very appropriate. Under the multiple union system, the cases where employer violate the right to organize workers through company dominated union are increasing. It is time to strengthen the capacity of the labor relations committee as well as the courts, and to collect indirect evidence from workers and labor unions.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 부당노동행위의 최근 동향 및 실태
Ⅲ. 지배·개입의 성립요건 및 지배·개 입의사의 존부판단
Ⅳ. 맺음말

키워드

해당간행물 수록 논문

참고문헌

교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!

신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.

바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!

교보e캐시 1,000원
TOP
인용하기
APA

이재목(Lee, Jae Mok). (2017).부당노동행위에 있어 지배·개입 의사에 관한 일고. 법학연구, 28 (2), 143-162

MLA

이재목(Lee, Jae Mok). "부당노동행위에 있어 지배·개입 의사에 관한 일고." 법학연구, 28.2(2017): 143-162

결제완료
e캐시 원 결제 계속 하시겠습니까?
교보 e캐시 간편 결제