Changes in Unionism

Government, Employers Should Also Respond in Kind

The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, the more militant of the nation's two umbrella organizations, is attempting to change itself. Or so it seems, at least as seen by its new leader who appeared in a jacket ― instead of a jumpsuit and headband ― at the news conference Thursday to explain the KCTU's ``struggle plans" for this year.

``We will combine fighting and bargaining rather than habitually adhering to opposition for its own sake," said Kim Young-hoon, the new, moderate union leader. ``The KCTU will also move closer to members and the general public as well as present concrete and realistic alternatives."

Few ― if any ― appear likely to stop them from doing so. Actually, this change for more rationalistic labor movement is long overdue to end annual strikes and violent labor-police clashes on the streets.

The KCTU's efforts for self-transformation is also inevitable to a large extent, as the umbrella union's somewhat excessive political and ideological fights have driven some 40 of its large member unions, including those of Korea Telecom and Seoul Metro, to break away from it and form a ``third federation," which was formally launched on the same day under the slogan of ``trust, service and integrity."

It remains to be seen whether Kim will be able to keep his promise, given the severe factional strife within the KCTU, which has turned the initially dovish leadership into a hawkish one for the unity of the vast organization in the past.

Unfortunately, the outlook for industrial peace is not very promising for this year, either.

For one, the new KCTU leader made it clear the union will fight against the Lee Myung-bak administration, which he said has implemented numerous ``anti-labor" policies, probably in reference to the extension of the allowable period for using temporary workers without turning them into regular employees as well as dropping full-time unionists from corporate payrolls.

The government says it is acting according to ``global standards" with respect to a no-pay system for union officials and allowing multiple unions at a single company. But it is hard to shake off the impression the Lee administration has been cherry-picking international standards in its focus on enhancing labor market flexibility. A case in point is the government's hardly-justifiable rejection of the government employees' union by magnifying rather minor technical problems.

Also worrisome about the new labor movement trend based on centrist, pragmatic principles is the possibility of excessively welfare-oriented unionism by big business groups, as seen in the declaration of the just-launched third organization called ``New Hope Labor Solidarity," deepening the existing gap between unions of large and small firms even further.

It was heartwarming in this regard to see unionized regular workers at Hyundai Motor Union have been fighting against the management in protest to the recent dismissal of 18 temporary workers for the reason of production cuts. Considering one of the biggest problems at the KCTU was the lack of solidarity between big business union members and their less privileged counterparts, including temps, what's happening at the Hyundai Motor union is a promising signal of change for the better.

Changes in unionism are welcome, but it takes not just two but three, including the government and management, to tango in industrial peace ― not least because the notoriously backward labor policy and equally outdated unionism have long been a chicken-and-egg question here