비정규직 노동자 실태와 비정규직 투쟁

Since the financial crisis of 1997, the non-regular worker problem which has been pointed out as the core factor of social polarization began to come to the fore as a major social issue. Although workers’struggles have been continuously practiced at the national level as well as at the workplace level with enhanced social concerns, the non-regular worker problem has not been improved. It is the purpose of this research to analyze how workers’ struggle has been practiced, what kind of consequences it has brought about, and whether it has responded to changing circumstances properly. The non-regular worker population still accounts for more than half of total workers, the income gap between regular and non-regular workers has become widened, and the unionization rate of non-regular workers remains below 3%, even decreasing further. Regarding the non-regular worker problem, workers’ struggle can be divided into three periods: the first period(1998-2002) is a period of social concerns in the process of formation, the second period(2003-2006) is a period of aggressive mobilization, and the third period(2007-present) is a period of defensive mobilization. Struggles have been vigorously carried out since the beginning of the second period, and the second period witnessed aggressive KCTU struggle toward the legalization of non-regular workers’ rights. On the other hand, during the third period, non-regular workers have engaged in struggles in a defensive manner as prompt reaction for survival up against capitalist offensives. KCTU’s general strikes failed to have the non-regular workers’ rights legalized, and non-regular worker struggles as well mostly failed at the workplace level. After all, it was not easy to improve the situation of non-regular workers. Given that the Roh government which seemed to be pro-labor had just started out, economic crisis was being eventually overcome, and there were sociopolitical discussions going on about the legalization of nonregual worker rights, KCTU’s general strikes in the second period,although failed, could be considered as an appropriate strategical choice. However, KCTU in the third period, under the MyungBak Lee government after the passage of non-regular worker laws, failed to select and execute effective strategies. After all, the main reasons for ever-worsening nonregular worker problem on the part of KCTU were the lack of concerns in the first period, insufficient abilities in the second period, and finally the absence of effective strategies in the third period.