재무성과 및 노동조합의 전략적 참여와사업장내 노사협의회 활성화에 관한 연구

Declining union membership and increasing individualism in Korean society have led to alternative models of collective representation being as a device through which unions may gain a workplace presence, or as a part of a union marginalization process. In countries like Germany, where unions colonized most works councils, and the two worker’s interest representation institutions then developed symbiotically, works councils may be linked to a high level of unionization(Western, 1999). But most developed countries such as the UK and the USA, where empirically based reports refer to the negative effects joint consultative committee on trade unionism. Therefore, there has been considerable international interest in works councils or joint consultative committees and their relations with unions in recent years(Addison, Bellman and Koelling, 2004; Brewster, Wood, Croucher and Brookes, 2007; Frege, 2002; Lee, Lee and Sung, 2013). However, the relationship between works councils and unions remains relatively under researched(Frege, 2002; French, 2001; Lee,Lee and Sung, 2013). The relationship between works councils and unions is a problematic issue because their functions and concerns both differ and overlap. Works councils represent all of an organization’s employees,whereas unions are membership-based organizations. The distinction may create key difficulties for unions. First, works councils may appear more representative of the workforce than unions. Second, as union membership has declined, works councils have increasingly contained non-union representatives. This has led to discussion of how far the representation gap can be narrowed by alternative forms of employee representation(Brewster et al., 2007). Although industrial democracy or labor-management partnership is realized through a multi-level relationship(Katz, Kochan and Colvin, 2008; Kochan and Katz, 1988; Kochan and McKersie, 1986; Lee and Lee, 2005), including union representation at firm or industrial level and direct employee involvement via works councils at workplace level, still we know little about the specific relationship between unions and works councils and how it influences the latter's functioning and effectiveness. Current research outcomes are inconclusive. For instance, one empirical study on the relationship between works councils and economic consequences found that greater employee involvement is associated with high worker productivity, but found no significant influence of works councils on firm profitability(Klein and Lee, 1997). In contrast, a different study found that non-union employee representation has a positive effect on profit, but found no significant influence of non-union employee representation on labor productivity(Nho, 2009). There may, in fact, be a reverse-causality between works councils and economic consequences. In order to examine a relationship between works councils and unions, data from the Korean Workplace Panel Survey(2009 survey–conducted by the Korean Labor Institute) was applied to examining the relationship between strategic involvement of unions and activities of works councils at workplace, which deduced from the councils/employee involvement model established by Freeman and Lazear(1995). Furthermore, this study also examined the influence of economic performance on the level of works councils’ activities at workplace, following the model employed in an empirical study on large Japanese firms(Morishima, 1992). The results of the current empirical study indicate as following: First, the economic performance has a positive effect on the operation level of works councils. Second, the strategic involvement of unions about plant (re)location have a reversed U-shaped relationship with the number of works councils meetings per a year in the workplace. Yet, no such significant curved influence of strategic involvement of unions about plant (re)location on the operation level of works councils at the workplace. There is certain possible explanations for the present study. For one, the relationship between a union’s strategic involvement and the operation level of works councils (based on the survey respondent’s subjective perception) separates from the relationship between union’s strategic involvement and the (objectively counting) number of works councils meeting per a year. It showed that the fitting of unions' strategic involvement and activities of works councils at workplace level is a difficult problem, thus it is carefully and sophisticatedly considered as a key factor to the integration of strategic and workplace industrial relations(IR) issues. Another explanation is that HRM departments are operating in two related but distinct areas:with unions at strategic level and works councils at workplace level. They have to manage and negotiate all of the subtle distinctions and fine lines between the different bodies identified earlier (Brewster et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2013). And also, it is clear that the appeal of unions depends on their capacity to address the needs of all employees and not only their own members through consultation, and to integrate non-union employee representation into their approaches(Brewster et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2013). Although the industrial democracy concept must address both industry wide and workplace issues in multi-level representation, this study analyzed and interpreted at single level only. Thus, further research may be necessary to analyze the multi-level relationship including the strategic involvement of unions at firm level, collective bargaining at functioning(HRM practice) level, and works councils activities at the workplace level.