기간제법상 차별시정제도 개선과제

The purpose of this article is to examine the current situation of the discrimination remedy system under the Fixed-term and Part-time Employees Act, which was prepared to resolve unreasonable discrimination against irregular employees, and to suggest improvement tasks for the revitalization of the system. Although the history of the discrimination remedy system has reached 15 years, contrary to the initial expectations, the average annual number of non-regular workers applying for discrimination remedy to the Labor Relations Commission is low. Although some institutional improvements have been made to solve this problem, there are still systemic obstacles that make it difficult for non-regular workers to easily access the application for discrimination remedy. In this article, six systematic improvement tasks are presented to diagnose the current situation of the discrimination remedy system by dividing the application for remedy of discriminatory treatment and a determination of whether or not discriminatory treatment exists. First, for universal guarantee of equal rights, the scope of application of the discrimination remedy system should be extended to workplaces with four or fewer employees so that all irregular employees do not face unreasonable discrimination. Second, the concept of a part-time employee in the Act should be revised so that if part-time employees is performing a job similar to that of regular employees, even if they are not engaged in the same type of work as regular employees, they can apply for discrimination remedy. Third, in order for collective discrimination against irregular employees to be remedied at the collective level, the right to apply for discrimination remedy should be recognized for the trade unions of which non-regular employees have joined. Fourth, in order to solve the problem that discrimination relief is limited due to the six-month application period, the starting point of the application period should include the date when the term of the employment contract expires. Fifth, in order to expand the scope of comparable workers, their categories include ex employees who were engaged in the same or similar work, employees recognized as comparable regardless of the type of work due to the nature of treatment, and employees recognized as appropriate in light of the need for equal treatment. Finally, the principle of proportionality should be stipulated in the current concept of discriminatory treatment so that judgment on whether there is a reasonable cause according to the principle of proportionality can be generalized in the practice of the Labor Relations Commission and the courts.