[Editorial] One Year of Labor Policy Marked by Rising Disputes: It Is Time to Correct the Confusion Over the Yellow Envelope Act

A survey found that the Lee Jae Myung administration's labor policy has scored only in the 60-point range over the past year. The result came from an evaluation of 38 labor policy items conducted among 1,000 people and released on the 15th at a forum hosted by the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) titled "One Year Review of the Lee Jae Myung Administration's Labor Policy." Respondents showed relatively strong support for measures such as imposing fines on employers who fail to pay wages, but gave low marks to key government policies including the Yellow Envelope Act, the 4.5-day workweek, and integrated support measures for foreign workers.
Taking this result seriously, the government and the ruling party should calmly reflect on whether labor policy over the past year has leaned too heavily toward unions. Labor policy should be judged not by the number of bills passed, but by whether it has reduced labor-management disputes and protected youth jobs and a stable employment environment. In that sense, the confusion spreading across industrial sites since the Yellow Envelope Act took effect should be seen as a painful failure of the government's labor policy.
Since the Yellow Envelope Act took effect in March, more than 11,600 subcontractor unions and about 160,000 members have demanded bargaining with 440 prime contractors over the past three months. Of those, 96 prime contractors went through procedures such as voluntary bargaining or unified bargaining channels, but only 10 actually entered formal negotiations. Another 141 prime contractors went through Labor Relations Commission procedures over issues such as employer status. A law meant to promote bargaining is instead generating more disputes over the bargaining process itself.
Labor groups are increasing the pressure. On this day, the KCTU held a general strike rally in Gwanghwamun, Seoul, with about 10,000 members, demanding direct bargaining by prime contractors and active government intervention. It claimed that its affiliated organizations had demanded negotiations with more than 400 prime contractors over the past four months, but that only four had actually held talks. It also declared that it would use this general strike as a starting point to intensify its summer struggle and expand the scale of its campaign in the second half of the year. With even the standards and procedures for bargaining still not properly settled, companies are being pressured in a blunt and indiscriminate way.
Conflict and confusion surrounding the Yellow Envelope Act are growing by the day. A representative case that fueled debate over expanding the definition of employer responsibility for prime contractors is the dispute between CJ Logistics and the parcel delivery union. The Central Labor Relations Commission and lower courts ruled that CJ Logistics had substantial influence over the working conditions of parcel delivery workers and that its refusal to engage in collective bargaining constituted an unfair labor practice. Based on those lower-court interpretations, politicians rushed to push legislation expanding the responsibility of prime contractors.
However, the Supreme Court of Korea recently overturned the lower-court ruling, saying that CJ Logistics, which has no direct or implied employment contract relationship, has no duty to engage in collective bargaining under the former Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act. The final legal judgment in the case that triggered the debate over the law differs from the starting point, yet politicians have hardened the logic of that starting point into law, deepening confusion on the ground.
A flawed law cannot be left unchanged. The fundamental problem with the Yellow Envelope Act is that the definition of employer is too vague and its scope of application too broad. This is also why objections, disputes, and even the risk of strikes are spreading like dominoes. Only by revising the law and improving the system to better reflect the realities of industrial sites can labor policy hope to deliver results.