필수유지업무제도에서 파업권 제한의 문제 - 판례 분석을 중심으로 -

Labor Union and Labor Relations Act was revised on December 30, 2006, and it has been 10 years since the compulsory arbitration system abolished and mandatory maintenance work system implemented. (The latter has been enforced since January 1, 2008.) The revision statements in 2006 mention that the mandatory maintenance service system was to “abolish the compulsory arbitration system for essential public service projects so that the right to act in dispute and public interests can be harmonized. Instead, introduce mandatory maintenance services for essential public service projects and allow alternative works”. In other words, we can interpret that the mandatory maintenance service system is obliged to maintain mandatory work in strikes and allow alternative work rather than abolishing the compulsory arbitration system for mandatory public service projects. However, it may be asked whether the rights to act in dispute at the essential public worksites are guaranteed in line with the legislative motto, ‘harmonizing the right to act and the public interest’ as it has been 10 years passed since the amendment. In order to determine the current situation, I would like to take a look at court cases related to strikes at essential public worksites which were decided after the enforcement of compulsory maintenance service system. Total 4 cases has been determined since January 1, 2008. Railroad Corporation strike and Gas Corporation strike in 2009, Railroad Corporation strike and Incheon International Airport Corporation strike in 2013 are those. This thesis introduces each four cases based on fact relations and court's rullings then discusses each issues in turn.