취업규칙의 판례법리와 취업규칙의 규범적 효력의 한계

Employment regulations have inherent limits in their normative effectiveness because they are unilaterally drafted by employers. Employment regulations cannot be considered norms in and of themselves. They are policies established by the state within the limits of complying with the provisions of the Labor Standards Act, and they have norm-like effectiveness. Therefore, while a labor contract that is less favorable than the employment regulations is invalid, a labor contract that is more favorable than the employment regulations has a priority effect over the employment regulations. The Labor Standards Act requires the consent of the collective of workers as a condition for detrimental changes to employment regulations. As the collective consent holds superior weight compared to individual consent, there is an argument that when detrimental changes to employment regulations are made with the collective consent, the disadvantageous employment regulations with collective consent take priority over more favorable labor contracts. However, even the requirement of collective consent for detrimental changes to employment regulations has the same limitation as the fact that employment regulations are unilaterally drafted by employers, as long as it possesses the essence of “post-consent.” Ultimately, in all cases of general changes or detrimental changes to employment regulations, employment regulations have the limitation of being unilaterally drafted by employers. Therefore, while a labor contract that is less favorable than the employment regulations is invalid, in cases where a more favorable labor contract exists than the employment regulations, it should be interpreted that the more favorable labor contract has a priority effect over the employment regulations.