[Editorial] Do not patch with guidelines; amend the Yellow Envelope Act instead

The Ministry of Employment and Labor announced on the 3rd a set of implementation guidelines titled "Guidelines for Labor Disputes Including Performance Bonuses," stating it would work to quell on-the-ground confusion resulting from the enforcement of the amended Labor Union Act (Yellow Envelope Act). The guidelines explicitly state that demands requiring companies to pre-allocate a certain percentage (N%) of profits as performance bonus funds, as well as decisions regarding new factory construction, expansion, relocation, business sales or acquisitions, and adoption of new technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), are in principle not subject to mandatory collective bargaining or labor disputes.

The Ministry of Employment and Labor stated that these guidelines would serve as a standard for the Labor Relations Commission's dispute mediation and determination of unfair labor practice cases. This is a desperate measure taken to put out immediate fires with guidance lines after on-the-ground confusion intensified following the law's enforcement. However, these guidelines are neither a law nor an executive decree. Lacking legal binding force, they are insufficient to prevent labor-management disputes.

The criteria in the guidelines remain still ambiguous. The Ministry of Employment and Labor stated that while investment decisions themselves are not subject to bargaining, if human resource operation plans become concrete and changes in working conditions can be objectively anticipated, related matters may become subject to bargaining. However, at which stage of an investment process objective anticipation of workforce changes begins is a point of contention. Management will argue it falls under "management's exclusive authority," while unions will counter that it signals "restructuring."

The root cause of this situation lies in the inclusion of a broad and ambiguous clause in the amended Labor Union Act, which defines labor dispute subjects as "business decisions affecting working conditions." At the time of the bill's passage, the ruling party dismissed concerns about infringement on management rights. As a result, mega-project investments such as those in semiconductor facilities in the Honam region face being held hostage by union bargaining demands and strike risks, leaving the government and ruling party caught in self-contradiction.

The inherent flaws of the law cannot be patched up with stopgap guidelines. The labor sector is protesting, calling it an illegal reduction, while the business sector remains anxious, stating that strike risks cannot be reduced. Since both interpretive guidelines and implementation guidelines have failed to provide solutions, all labor-management conflicts will shift to the Labor Relations Commission and courts, resulting only in enormous social costs.

The scope of labor disputes involves not only the three labor rights guaranteed under the Constitution but also critical matters that affect corporate freedom of operation, national investment, and overall employment. The National Assembly must review and correct the deficiencies of the Yellow Envelope Act by broadly gathering opinions from the labor sector, business sector, legal experts, and academics, and then address these issues through legislation. Only then can the vicious cycle of strikes and lawsuits be broken, and stability in labor-management relations be pursued through dialogue.