미국의 다면적 노무제공관계에서 단체교섭 응낙의무를 둘러싼 쟁점 -미국 공동사용자 법리와 교섭의무 부담 범위를 중심으로-

Recently, the court recognized CJ Logistics Corporation, which is in a position to resolve the dispute, as a employer of a courier belonging to a agency. The ruling of CJ Logistics Corporation follows the basic legal principles established by the ruling of Hyundai Heavy Industries. Additionally, the ruling establishes and identifies an employer who is able to substantially resolve disputes in unfair labor practices involving the refusal to engage in collective bargaining. In the United States, the joint employer principle and the single employer principle have been formed and developed to determine employers who bear collective bargaining obligations in multilateral labor-providing relationships. Specifically, the joint employer relationship is recognized in situations similar to those in which Korea's dominance theory is recognized. The legal principles concerning joint employers and bargaining units in the United States align with Korea's dominance theory in the following respects. First, a judgment is made on the collective bargaining obligation for each employment condition based on the control held by the parties involved. Second, both the original employer and any other employer who exercises control are responsible for bearing the collective bargaining obligation to the extent of their control. However, differences in the collective bargaining system and legal principles lead to variations in the methods of recognizing control and establishing bargaining units. This article examines the legal principles and laws pertaining to collective bargaining, with a focus on the similarities and differences between the joint employer legal principles in the United States and Korea's dominance theory. In the case of Korea, unlike the United States, where the right to collective bargaining is guaranteed through legislative policy, Korea guarantees the right to collective bargaining at the constitutional level. Recently, the Supreme Court recognized the direct normative power of fundamental labor rights through the KTU (Korean Teachers and Educational Workers' Union) decision. As a result, the significance of guaranteeing the right to collective bargaining can be emphasized and understood more prominently in discussions in Korea compared to the United States. If the legal principles established in the ruling of CJ Logistics Corporation are cited in future cases, it is anticipated that conflicting views may arise regarding the recognition method of its dominance and the interpretation of mandatory bargaining matters. It is necessary to develop theories and legal principles that assess the obligation to engage in collective bargaining by categorizing the agenda for collective bargaining, with a focus on the specific realization of the right to collective bargaining.