주휴수당:구시대적인 노동법 인식과 정책효과 오판

This study began with the question of whether strict law enforcement is always appropriate in a discrepancy between law and reality that this author experienced while providing work supervision. It was a case where Workplace B violated the Labor Standards Act for failing to provide weekly holiday allowance even though it paid more money in total wages than Workplace A. This gave rise to some questions: How is it possible to reason and hold Workplace B responsible for violating the law as opposed to Workplace A? Is it not too onerous to force a small workplace to follow this law when the judgement is inconsistent even among experts due to a complex legal relationship, although it is the basic law to follow? This study examined the exact nature of paid holiday or weekly holiday allowance that we are obligated to follow. It investigated how paid holiday was established; the characteristics of the requirement for ‘wages paid on holidays’ and ‘hours recognized as paid’; the problems occurring in relation to the minimum wage, the ordinary wage; the side effects including so-called ‘splitting the number of working hours’ of those subject to the requirements who are in fact unaware of, ignore, or avoid the weekly holiday allowance requirements as the requirements are abstract and complicated; and the situation that gave rise to conflict between labor and management. In addition, this paper considered whether to maintain or abolish holiday allowance based on the role of labor law in the contemporary era and reasoning outside conventional ideas. In conclusion, the intent is an illusion and does not fit in with an equal labor-management relation that we are supposed to seek.