남녀고용평등법의 실효성 고찰 - 시행 20년의 법적용 현황과 발전방향을 중심으로

This study aims to make recommendations for improvement in the enforcement of 『the Equal Employment Act, 1987』, reviewing its implementation over the last 20 years focused on prohibition of sex discrimination and its remedy. To do this, firstly, this paper reviews the changes of 『the Equal Employment Act, 1987』and its practices centered on provisions that prohibit sex discrimination and define what is discrimination in the workplace. Secondly, this explores dispute settlement system and remedy procedures with non-judicial or judicial agencies to assess the legal effectiveness when the discriminatory case is made. Lastly, based on the results discovered, it provides some suggestions for the Equal Employment Act to be more effective. Many changes have been made in legal and cultural spheres through 『the Equal Employment Act, 1987』. First of all, this Act states indirect discrimination by defining direct and indirect discrimination, which entails to articulation of discrimination and enables to add a variety of grounds as a protected basis in law. In other words, not only sex but also marital status, pregnancy, childbirth and family status etc are specified as a prohibited grounds of discrimination. This law also reflects the principle on equality in a more positive way, by declaring for affirmative/positive action. In addition, this Act clearly establishes prohibition of discrimination in hiring process such as recruitment, pay and benefits, training, promotion and transfer opportunities, and dismissal. Furthermore, to strongly enforce the law employers have the burden of proof in discrimination cases. Such regulations that prevent sex discrimination at work have lead to abolish unequal or unfair system such as “omen employee system in bank” “ismissal after marriage”and “arly enforced retirement for women” However, sex segregation, increase of irregular work for women and outsourcing of women-congregated job become greater in the labor market. Therefore, the existing legal system is not sufficient to promote equality in employment. For instance, “upervisor system for equal employment”that is to observe equal opportunities and to counsel being discriminated against sex on the problems did not work well. Non-judicial or judicial system were also not successful in considering cases dealt with. Thus, to be more effective, some recommendations and suggestions to cover shortcomings for the current law are needed. To achieve these, the socio-cultural and institutional infrastructure is also required.