JIPYONG LLC

A company ‘A’ (the “Company”) had two labor unions, B labor union and C labor union. The B labor union, which is a corporate labor union, has the status as a bargaining representative labor union. The C labor union filed a petition for correction of violation of the duty of fair representation and for remedy of unfair labor practices with the Labor Relations Commission, claiming that (i) the B labor union’s violation of procedural rationality, such as its failure to collect opinions during the collective bargaining negotiation for execution of wage agreement, constitutes a violation of the duty of fair representation, and (ii) the wage agreement between the Company and the B Labor Union, which discriminates the wage increase against certain occupational groups and certain job types in comparison with the section chiefs in certain occupational groups, constitutes a violation of the duty of fair representation and unfair labor practices of control and intervention. Both the Regional Labor Relations Commission for the first instance and the National Labor Relations Commission decided to reject the petition filed by the C Labor Union. 

Representing the Company in the administrative litigation filed by the C labor union, JIPYONG’s Labor Team elaborated on the background that the proposed wage increase was introduced and the wage agreement was executed. Accepting arguments of the Company, the Seoul Administrative Court dismissed all of the claims of the C labor union, finding that the B labor union cannot be deemed to have violated the duty of fair representation; that the Company’s discriminative actions against the C labor union cannot be recognized; and that the unfair labor practices of control/intervention based on these alleged discriminative actions cannot be an issue unless such discriminative actions are recognized.