Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Equality of Treatment (Accident Compensation) Convention, 1925 (No. 19) - Republic of Korea (Ratification: 2001)

Article 1 of the Convention. Equality of treatment of migrant workers. For a number of years, the Committee has been pointing to the fact that the national legislation does not guarantee equality of treatment between national workers and workers from countries party to the Convention, and their dependants, which leave the Republic of Korea following an employment injury. Pursuant to sections 57 and 58 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (IACIA), the disability pension of foreign workers, which leave the Republic of Korea, is terminated and converted into a lump sum whereas Korean national transferring their residence abroad are allowed to continue receiving their employment injury pensions. The Government indicates in its report that this measure was introduced, following an amendment to IACIA, as it would be difficult to manage changes in the eligibility of recipients living abroad. The Committee asks the Government to explain why the payment of benefits and keeping of records is not considered problematic in the case of Korean nationals residing abroad but only with respect to foreign nationals. Recalling that under Article 4 of the Convention, ratifying States undertake to afford each other mutual assistance with a view to facilitating the execution of their respective laws and regulations on workmen’s compensation, the Committee invites the Government to seek to collaborate with the social security administrations of other countries party to the Convention with a view to concluding the necessary practical arrangements for the payment of employment injury pensions to beneficiaries who transfer their residence to these countries.

In addition, the Committee points out that, according to the IACIA, following a conversion of a pension into a lump sum, the latter is equivalent to about four and a half years of regular annuity payments, whereas the good practice and the most advanced ILO standards recommend that the lump sum should represent the actuarial equivalent of the corresponding periodical payment. Applying the same formula for all foreign workers victims of employment injury regardless of their age can indeed result in substantial losses compared to the benefits that a disabled worker would receive if they continued regular periodical benefits. The Committee therefore asks the Government to take measures aimed at re-establishing equality of treatment between national and foreign workers in accordance with the Convention by amending sections 57 and 58 of the IACIA accordingly.

Part V of the report form. Supervision and enforcement of the application of the Convention in practice. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that efforts are under way to improve the industrial accidents reporting system and to introduce a criminal offence for cases in which employers would intentionally cover up industrial accidents. The Committee hopes that, in its next report, the Government will be in a position to provide details as regards these improvements and any new legal provisions aimed at securing better compliance with the national legislation on employment injury, particularly in cases where the employer has failed to report the industrial accident or to comply with the duty to sign and seal application letters for workers’ compensation.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2018.]