Cas individuel (CAS) - Discussion : 2014, Publication : 103ème session CIT (2014)

Convention (n° 111) concernant la discrimination (emploi et profession), 1958 - République de Corée (Ratification: 1998)



The Government provided the following written information.

With regard to the protection of migrant workers, the Government of the Republic of Korea aims to set best practice in the management of labour migration. A transparent selection system is in place to help prevent workers under the Employment Permit System (“EPS workers”) from being taken advantage of. After entering the Republic of Korea, EPS workers are provided with detailed information on their rights under all relevant labour laws, including the Labour Standards Act, occupational safety education and detailed instructions on the means and procedures for filing a complaint when their rights have been infringed. The education costs are fully borne by their employers. Labour laws, including the Industrial Accident Compensation Act, the Minimum Wage Act and the Labour Standards Act, are also applied to both migrant workers and Korean nationals. The 47 local labour offices across the country are responsible for dealing with complaints of the violation of rights under labour laws. After providing guidance and conducting inspections of 3,048 workplaces in 2013, the Government found a total of 5,662 cases of violations (in 1,992 businesses) and issued correction orders, imposed fines and notified relevant agencies, including the Ministry of Justice, of the violations. Most cases involved violations of administrative duties or procedures, such as migrant workers or employers not joining insurance schemes and employment changes not being reported. Sixty-four job centres under the Ministry of Employment and Labour across the country deal with various employment-related matters for migrant workers, including the extension of employment periods, and provide counselling services regarding legal matters. A total of 37 support centres and one call centre for migrant workers are in operation. These provide various services free of charge, such as counselling services on labour law language and cultural awareness training, medical check-ups and shelters. Five more support centres will be established in 2014, to improve services for migrant workers and better protect their rights. Free interpretation services are also provided. In 2013, the Government, in cooperation with the embassies in the Republic of Korea of countries of origin, organized 11 cultural events for migrant workers. A national cultural event called the “Korean Cultural Festival with Migrant Workers” was also held. In 2013, 5,826 migrant workers completed fully funded vocational training in various areas, such as computer literacy, operation of heavy construction equipment and car repair. An insurance system designed exclusively for EPS workers is in operation. The Government requires employers to join the “guarantee insurance” for overdue wages and the “departure guarantee insurance” to protect migrant workers from the risk of overdue wages or severance pay. Under the returnee support programme, information sessions are held to inform the workers on how to prepare for their return to their home countries. For instance, instructions are provided on how to collect unpaid wages and receive insurance benefits. In 2013, 68 information sessions were held and attended by 6,465 EPS workers. After the departure of EPS workers, the Government supports migrant workers to build returnee community networks in their home countries, provides job placement services for returnees and ensures that migrant workers who left the Republic of Korea without receiving the insurance compensation of the “departure guarantee insurance” or the return cost insurance, receive such insurance compensation. In 2013, 270 million Korean won (KRW) (approximately US$265,000) were paid for 249 cases under “departure guarantee insurance”, and KRW500 million (approximately $490,000) were paid for 1,208 cases under the return cost insurance. If the returnees decide to come back to the Republic of Korea and find work in the Republic of Korea, they are provided with an opportunity for re-entry and employment.

With reference to equality of opportunity and treatment for women and men, the economic activity rate and employment rate of women in the Republic of Korea were on a continued rise (53.9 per cent of female activity rate and 52.2 per cent of women in employment in 2009 and 55.6 per cent of female activity rate and 53.9 per cent of women in employment in 2013). The percentage of women workers and managers has risen steadily in workplaces which are subject to the Government’s affirmative action scheme, with 36 per cent of women workers and 17 per cent of women managers in 2013. The proportion of women workers in the public sector has also increased, with 42.7 per cent of women public officials and 27.7 per cent of women appointed in central agencies in 2013. Moreover, the use of paid maternity leave (up to 90 days) and childcare leave available to those with a child under the age of 6 has increased. In this respect 90,507 women took maternity leave in 2013 and 69,616 workers took childcare leave in 2013.

Respecting the supervisory activities of labour inspectors concerning discrimination against non-regular workers, in 2013, the Government inspected a total of 1,112 workplaces which employ a large number of non-regular workers, such as fixed-term, dispatched and in-house subcontracted workers: 991 were found to have committed 4,468 violations of labour laws, 54 cases were sent to the prosecutor’s office; fines were imposed in nine cases; and administrative action was taken in 123 cases. Most cases involved violations of the Labour Standards Act or the Minimum Wage Act, and other cases included 589 violations of the Act on the Protection of Dispatched Workers and there were 213 violations of the Act on the Protection of Fixed-term and Part time Employees.

In addition, before the Committee, a Government representative said that the Government had been making every effort to respect, promote and implement the principles and rights enshrined in the Convention and highlighted the Korean Government’s legal amendments and policy measures to eliminate discrimination in employment and occupation. The Act on the Protection of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Employees and the Act on the Protection of Dispatched Workers had been revised in March 2013 and March 2014 to ensure that the working conditions and fringe benefits of fixed-term and part-time workers were guaranteed against discrimination and to establish a punitive monetary compensation system to address repeated or wilful discrimination. In December 2013, the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Equal Employment and Support for Work-Family Reconciliation had been amended and the minimum proportion of women employees and managers which was used as the criterion to impose affirmative action obligations had been raised from 60 per cent of the average number of women workers for the same industry to 70 per cent. Under the revised Act on Equal Employment and Support for Work-Family Reconciliation in January 2014, a list of employers failing to comply with affirmative action obligations would be made public beginning in 2015. In February 2014, the Government had announced a plan to help working women, who were married or had children, maintain their careers. Under the plan, it had become possible for people entitled to childcare leave to ask instead for a reduction of their working hours. Moreover, the Act on the Employment of Foreign Workers had been amended in 2013 to require “departure guarantee insurance” benefits to be paid to foreign workers within 14 days after the date of departure. With regard to equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women, the Government supported the vocational skills development of women through a vocational voucher system to enhance women’s employability, and to help them return to work. Furthermore, the Government had announced Support Measures for Working Women’s Career Continuation at Every Stage of Life on 4 February 2014, aiming to reduce the childcare burden of women, increase men’s participation in childcare, and create a working environment that engendered a healthy work–family balance. The Government, all public institutions and businesses with 500 employees or more, were taking affirmative action to tackle discrimination against women. Since an affirmative action programme had been introduced in 2006, the employment rate of women had increased from 30.8 per cent in 2006 to 36 per cent in 2013, and the percentage of women managers had increased from 10.2 per cent in 2006 to 17 per cent in 2013.

The Government representative indicated that, since the adoption of the Measures for Non-regular Workers in the Public Sector in November 2011, 22,069 non-regular workers engaged in permanent and continuous work in the public sector had become workers with open-ended contracts by 2012, increasing to 31,782 in 2013. The Government had revised the Act on the Protection of Dispatched Workers in August 2012 to require employers to directly and immediately hire illegally dispatched workers identified by the labour inspection. As a result, 2,489 people in 2012 and 3,800 people in 2013 had been directly hired in accordance with government orders. The Government had also made it mandatory for companies with more than 300 employees to announce their current status of employment types starting from 2014 to encourage companies to convert non-regular workers into regular status. The Government planned to introduce the Guideline for Non-regular Workers’ Employment Security and Conversion into Regular Status in 2014. With regard to migrant workers, EPS workers were allowed to change workplaces if certain criteria provided for in the law were met. Every year, the Government inspected approximately 5,000 workplaces which employed migrant workers, issued corrective orders and imposed sanctions against violations of labour laws to protect the rights of migrant workers. With regard to discrimination based on political opinion, he recalled that in 2012 the Constitutional Court had ruled that the prohibition and restrictions on political activities of public officials, including school teachers, was constitutional. In conclusion, the policy measures of the Government were designed to eliminate discrimination in a way that was most appropriate within the framework of the national context and practices of the Republic of Korea, in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention. He added that the Government would continue to move forward in consultation with various sectors, including the tripartite constituents, for sustainable growth and social development.

The Employer members recalled that this case was being examined for the third time since 2009. In 2013, the Committee had concluded that the Republic of Korea should take steps in three areas to prevent or bring discriminatory practices to an end with respect to migrant workers, women, and primary and secondary school teachers. With respect to the EPS, migrant workers were allowed to change jobs when they were subject to unfair treatment. Foreign workers could file a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and submit the outcome of the decision to their respective job centre, which could authorize the migrant worker concerned to change employment or carry out an enquiry into the grounds of discrimination. Only six cases had been brought before the NCRC, and five had been dismissed. As stated by the Employer members in 2013, these figures confirmed the difficulties of migrant workers to assert their rights for reasons linked to linguistic and cultural differences. They encouraged the Government to continue its efforts to ensure that migrant workers had access to the information and assistance needed to handle impartially discrimination cases that were based on nationality, religion, gender or disability, as provided for under the legislation. Furthermore, they were of the opinion that the arrangements in place worked well because the Government had provided specific data on the number of workplaces inspected, the number of violations and the steps taken to make migrant workers aware of the applicable legislation and procedures of redress for both foreign and national workers.

With regard to discrimination against women, an increasing number of enterprises were changing the status of irregular workers to regular workers, and labour inspections had been carried out on a regular basis since 2012. The Government had therefore taken a number of measures to curb irregular employment. The fact that these measures mostly affected women, who accounted for a large share of irregular employment, did not mean that they could systematically be qualified as discrimination. However, as requested by the Committee of Experts, more specific information on this matter would be relevant to be able to assess the impact of the measures taken on women’s employment. With regard to equality of opportunity and treatment, the Employer members noted that a number of positive action mechanisms were operating in the Republic of Korea, such as the obligation for enterprises employing more than 500 workers to publish information on the number of women employed and women managers. The system of honorary equal employment inspectors also operated. Although additional measures could be taken, the current ones were developing in the right direction with a view to increasing the activity rate of women and putting a stop to all forms of discrimination towards them. They encouraged the Government to continue with this course of action. Referring to a ruling by the Supreme Court on the participation of teachers in political activity (2012), the Employer members felt that the political neutrality of teachers in primary and secondary schools was justified when this principle applied in the education sector. When the principle of political neutrality was applied outside this sector, it should be justified on the basis of specific criteria and objectives linked to the requirements of a particular job, because it was likely to constitute discrimination based on political opinion. In 2013, the Employer members had asked the Government to provide information on the matter. They therefore called on the Government to ensure that the principle of neutrality was thus defined and that the requirement of teachers’ political neutrality was justified on the basis of specific and objective criteria in accordance with Article 1(2) of the Convention. They also asked the Government to take the necessary steps to protect teachers against discrimination based on political opinion.

The Worker members deeply regretted that serious violations of the Convention had continued in the Republic of Korea. They protested against the arrest of the General Secretary of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) following his participation in a march calling on the Government to take responsibility for the recent ferry disaster. His arrest undermined the ability of the KCTU to carry out its important work as a national centre and to participate fully in the work of the ILO. The Government had been urged in 2013 to avail itself of ILO technical assistance, which it had not done, in order to bring its laws and practice into line with the Convention. Migrant work was regulated under the EPS. Concerns had been expressed about the system and steps should be taken to address them. Referring to the comments of the previous the year, the Government was once again urged to take steps, in collaboration with employers’ and workers’ organizations, to protect migrant workers from discrimination. The EPS legislation did not expressly prohibit changes of workplace; however various restrictions made the process difficult in practice. Migrant workers were only allowed to change their job a total of three times in a three-year period. In addition, their employer had to agree to the change by signing a release document and, where permission was not granted, migrant workers who left their jobs lost their regular migration status. The job centre had the authority to deal with cases without release papers. In such instances, however, the burden of proving discrimination fell entirely on the migrant worker. Although a Ministry of Labour directive covered such cases, the Committee of Experts had noted that it was still not entirely clear how jobcentres “objectively recognized” a victim of discrimination. Korean labour law imposed a ban on political expression by civil servants and certain teachers, which had been denounced by the ILO on several occasions. They once again urged the Government to take steps to ensure effective protection against discrimination based on political opinion, in particular for pre-school, primary and secondary school teachers. The Korean Constitutional Court had ruled in March 2014 against the Korean Government Employees Union (KGEU) and the Korean Teachers and Education Workers’ Union (KTU), two public sector unions that had filed a complaint to strike down the ban on political expression. In November 2013, the Government had used the excuse of an alleged lack of political neutrality to obtain warrants to search and seize the servers of the KGEU and KTU. The prosecutor’s office had conducted a second search on another server and had inspected personal telephone records. A third search had been conducted on another seven servers, which was not included in the warrant. It was clear that the seizure had had no other purpose than to harass and intimidate KGEU leaders and members. The KTU had been deregistered because the union allowed dismissed and retired workers to be members, even though the ILO had repeatedly reaffirmed that such workers were entitled to be union members. A final decision on this case was expected in June 2014. The KGEU had never been registered for the same reason.

Over a third of the workforce was in some form of precarious work. This had created a two-tier labour market with little mobility between the two tiers. Precarious workers earned roughly 40 per cent less than regular workers doing the same or similar work. Women workers were disproportionately affected. The seriousness of the problem had been noted by the international community, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Women’s participation in the labour force was the lowest in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), at about 60 per cent, which was 23 per cent below Korean men. The gender earnings gap was also the highest in the OECD. Indeed, the Committee of Experts had observed many times that the concentration of women in precarious forms of employment violated the country’s obligations under the Convention. The Worker members urged the Government to take the necessary measures to protect fixed-term, part-time and dispatched workers against discrimination, and particularly women, and to provide information on the impact on precarious employment of the measures adopted in 2011, including the measures to convert non-regular employment into regular employment and measures for the protection of subcontracted workers. The trade unions had yet to see any progress on the regularization of workers engaged under precarious work conditions.

The Employer member of the Republic of Korea explained that, under the EPS, foreign workers were allowed to change workplace up to three times during their stay in the Republic of Korea (and two more times in the case of re-employment). However, there was no limit to workplace changes when they were not due to the behaviour of the migrant worker. For example, in the case of the closure or suspension of a business, or of unfair treatment. Findings had shown that the number of foreign workers applying for a change of workplace had been increasing, often for the purpose of obtaining a wage increase. Under the circumstances, if foreign workers were to be fully allowed to change workplaces, they would be tempted to do so even for a minor difference in wage levels. The frequent movement of migrants would make it difficult for employers to manage their workforce and increase their financial burden. Regarding discrimination based on sex and employment status, the relevant laws had been amended to prohibit discrimination and workers could request corrective measures. Employers in the Republic of Korea were concerned about increased labour market regulation. In this regard, she drew attention to the rule that, if a fixed-term or part-time worker had been working for longer than two years at one workplace, the workers’ employment contract had to be converted and the worker was considered to be directly employed. Increased labour market regulation had made the labour market more rigid, which had led employers to hire more non-regular workers to adapt to the changing business environment. Regarding equality of opportunity between men and women, she agreed that women’s economic participation rate was low. In order to increase their participation, it was necessary to take into account a large spectrum of different types of employment. By doing so, work–life balance could be achieved. It should also be taken into account that some women had voluntarily opted to become non-regular workers for reasons of maintaining a work–life balance. In general, women’s wages were lower than men’s, but that was a result of many factors, rather than just discrimination. For example, many women preferred to work part time because of childcare responsibilities, and in this case their working hours and work experience would be less than that of men. Moreover, the law already required certain companies to apply affirmative action and the Republic of Korea was the only country in Asia which required companies to do so. The level of regulation was also higher than that of other advanced nations. Lastly, regarding discrimination on the basis of political opinion, she reiterated that in the Republic of Korea civil servants and teachers were asked to remain politically neutral. This, however, did not mean that they had to give up political freedom. Rather they were requested not to show their political views when performing their profession.

A Worker member of the Republic of Korea indicated that, despite the conclusions adopted by this Committee in 2009 and 2013, no tangible improvements could be noted. Precarious workers, the majority of whom were women, accounted for 50 per cent of the total workforce and 78 per cent of the workforce in those workplaces with fewer than five employees. Women non-regular workers earned 35.5 per cent of men’s wages. While 84 to 99 per cent of regular workers were covered by social security, only 33 to 39 per cent of non-regular workers were covered by such schemes. Similar situations existed with respect to severance pay, bonuses and overtime pay. This important wage gap between regular and non-regular workers was the consequence of serious flaws in the existing legislation. It was also extremely difficult for precarious workers to seek redress as they feared retaliation by employers. Employers generally terminated employment contracts before the completion of a statutory period that would allow fixed-term workers to be considered as regular workers. Furthermore, workers in various special employment arrangements were not covered by the legislation, and were thus denied appropriate working conditions and social protection. The Government should take all necessary steps to bring the relevant law and practice into line with the Convention, in particular with respect to effective access of these workers to remedies. The Labour Standards Act should provide for direct employment by the user company and all workers should be covered by industrial accidents insurance and provided with equal training opportunities. In this regard, it should be noted that in the recent ferry disaster, which had claimed 300 lives, more than two-thirds of the crew members were contract workers.

Another Worker member of the Republic of Korea expressed deep regret at the lack of improvement in the implementation of the Convention. Indeed, the situation had been exacerbated. The EPS still did not provide migrant workers with adequate flexibility to change employer. In addition, on 29 July 2014, the amended provision regarding severance pay of the Act on Foreign Workers’ Employment would enter into effect. After this, migrant workers would only be paid severance pay “within 14 days after the departure date”, whereas up to now they had received the payment within three days of leaving their job, regardless of whether they left the country. Turning to the situation of non-regular workers, she indicated that discrimination and exploitation of indirectly employed workers had become an issue of national importance when a subcontracted worker had committed self-immolation in October 2013. Companies, especially major conglomerates, were increasingly turning to this type of employment in order to circumvent labour regulations, and this practice was increasing the number of precarious workers. Workers in indirect employment were discriminated against despite the fact that they were doing the same work as regular workers. This year, the Government had strengthened the penalties and introduced punitive damages against employers who discriminated against precarious workers. While the Government considered this to be an improvement, in reality penalties and punitive damages were imposed only in cases in which the Labour Relations Commission found discrimination following a complaint by an individual worker. Since trade unions were still not allowed to represent individual precarious workers, those workers had no access to effective remedies. She also drew attention to the very high number of fatal industrial accidents incurred by indirectly employed or subcontracted workers, and regretted the death of eight subcontracting workers during work in the past two months. Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, subcontracted workers were not equally protected against industrial accidents, even when doing the same job at the same workplace. In practice, subcontracted workers did not have safety equipment and could not participate on an equal footing with other workers in the council or investigation body on occupational safety and health. In order to end the increase in the death toll of precarious and especially subcontracted workers, all workers should be protected under the same system without discrimination. The Committee’s conclusions the previous year had not been implemented and the Government was in violation of many other ILO standards, which had required an urgent ILO intervention four times within a year. A direct contacts mission was therefore inevitable to end this indifference towards international labour standards.

An observer representing Education International addressed two issues affecting teachers and the KTU. The first concerned the fact that teachers did not enjoy civil and political rights, unlike lecturers in higher education and other citizens. In that regard, the Committee of Experts had urged the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that elementary, primary and secondary school teachers were protected against discrimination based on political opinion, as provided for in the Convention. In March 2014, the Constitutional Court had issued a contrasting verdict on the status of the KTU, in which a narrow majority of the judges (five out of nine) had decided that the discrimination was reasonable owing to the different nature of the work, thus ruling against the recommendations made by the Committee in 2013 that the Government should bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention. The second issue concerned the fact that retired and dismissed teachers were not entitled to join a trade union. That situation had led the authorities to annul the legal status of the teachers’ unions. The law provided that only employed teachers could join a union and the Committee on Freedom of Association had repeatedly urged the Government to repeal the provisions prohibiting dismissed and unemployed workers from keeping their union membership. Until now the KTU, of which nine members had been dismissed, had reformed its legal status, but on 19 June 2014 the decision on the legal status of the union would be issued. Regarding the KGEU, the decision of the Supreme Court to support the Government’s refusal to register the union was a matter of concern. In March 2014, the Committee on Freedom of Association had urged the Government to take necessary measures to ensure the certification of the KTU without delay and to facilitate the registration of the KGEU. Education International was especially concerned about the avalanche of judicial decisions that undermined respect for ILO Conventions and narrowed the scope of union activities in the Republic of Korea. The Government should once again be asked to respect international labour standards by giving all teachers civil and political rights.

An observer representing Public Services International (PSI) raised the issue of deeply entrenched discrimination against precarious workers in the public sector, where a 70 per cent employment rate was envisaged through deregulation, cost cutting and efficiency maximization. These measures were part of a plan to expand part-time jobs, targeted at 3 per cent of newly hired civil servants in 2014. These lower paid, lower status jobs predominantly targeted women workers. This policy deepened discrimination between men and women, and had a negative impact on the quality of public services. Since the election of the new President of the Republic, short-term contracts for directly employed public sector workers had been converted into permanent contracts after the completion of two years of continuous employment. This measure however only targeted one third of the total of one million precarious workers in the public sector, and did not eliminate wage discrimination against these workers or enhance their job security. The measure had also resulted in an artificial reduction of the duration of short-term contracts with the aim of avoiding completion of two years’ of continuous employment. She referred to the Sewol ferry tragedy of 16 April 2014, which had its origins in deregulation, outsourcing and privatization policies, and the expanded use of precarious workers. To genuinely address discrimination against precarious workers, she called on the Government to develop a plan for the gradual direct employment of subcontracted workers with permanent jobs. She called for an ILO direct contacts mission to achieve real progress, based on the application of the relevant ILO Conventions, which had become more relevant given the export of the Korean model of precarious work to other countries by large Korean companies.

The Worker member of Nepal said that under the EPS, introduced in 2004, an employer had complete control over migrant workers. Migrant workers could not change employers, and this restriction increased the risk of exploitation and abuse in the workplace. The Government had also suppressed the trade union rights of migrant workers, and since 2005, most leaders of migrant trade unions had been deported. Following an intervention of the courts, the migrant workers’ trade union had been registered, but the attitude by the Government remained suppressive. Despite having passed a Korean language test in order to enter the labour market, migrant workers were not treated as qualified workers. These workers faced discrimination in overtime and were forced to work long hours and to engage in unpaid work. The forthcoming legislation regarding severance pay would also result in discrimination against migrant workers. In addition, the exclusion of the agricultural sector, where most migrant workers were engaged through the EPS, contributed to discrimination against these workers. The recent publication by the EPS office of a list of migrant workers in an irregular situation constituted a violation of workers’ privacy. The EPS needed to be improved so that migrant workers were treated equally in terms of wages, social security, severance pay, working hours and union activity. The labour law should be enforced equally in workplaces where migrant workers were engaged and their trade union rights should be respected.

The Government representative said that, although the labour legislation applied equally in principle to Korean workers and migrant workers covered under the EPS, it nonetheless allowed for a certain flexibility given the varying characteristics of these workers. Both the 1958 Report prepared with the view to the adoption of Convention No. 111 and the 1996 Special Survey on equality in employment and occupation noted that the concept of national extraction in the Convention did not refer to the distinctions that might be made between the citizens of a given country and persons of another nationality. Furthermore, the direct comparison between the severance pay of Korean nationals and the departure guarantee insurance provided for under the EPS was not appropriate. Although the departure guarantee insurance constituted a way of ensuring severance pay for foreign workers, it also set out to prevent any delays in payment and to secure a livelihood for these workers once they had left the country. The burden of proof did not lie solely with the workers. If a worker under the EPS submitted evidence, the local job centre made a judgement primarily on the basis of that evidence. However, in the event of no or insufficient evidence, the job centre itself tried to gather together the facts to deal with the case. In addition, the Government was implementing various measures to facilitate the entry of non-regular workers into regular employment. In this respect, enterprises with over 300 employees were now bound to provide statistics on the various work contracts applicable to their staff. This year, the Government was planning to establish guidelines to help non-regular workers enter regular employment and to encourage those workers to accept the guidelines voluntarily. It also intended establishing its role as a model employer. As stated in the 1996 Special Survey of the Committee of Experts, the Convention did not contain any specific provision concerning the right to establish trade unions, thereby avoiding any overlap with Convention No. 87. There was therefore no need to go into detail on the issues related to the so-called KGEU and the KTU. It should nonetheless be noted that the measures taken by the Government with respect to the KGEU and the KTU were both lawful and legitimate. In conclusion, he hoped that the Committee of Experts would continue to support the effective implementation of the Convention within the specific scope of the instrument and recalled the Government’s firm commitment to eliminate all forms of discrimination in employment.

The Employer members considered that problems remained in the application of the Convention, even though it should be recognized that steps had been taken by the Government with regard to discrimination likely to affect migrant workers, workers in precarious employment, women and also public sector teachers. Before any proposal was made to send a direct contacts mission, the Government needed to step up its efforts and its cooperation with the ILO to take account of the observations of the Committee of Experts concerning the various situations that might generate discrimination, including discrimination concerning access to legal remedies for migrant workers and discrimination on the basis of political opinion affecting teachers in the public education system.

The Worker members recalled that the Government and Employer members had provided information on the measures taken to address discrimination in the country, while several Worker members had indicated that important steps still needed to be taken. Migrant workers still faced discrimination in the country, and many public sector workers were prohibited from expressing their political opinion, in violation of the Convention. The Government was not relieved of its obligations under the Convention, even if the decision by the Constitutional Court was inconsistent with the Convention. Even with the amendments made to the legislation on dispatch workers and fixed-term workers, a large portion of the Korean workforce continued to be trapped in low-paid insecure jobs. They urged the Government to respect the civil and political rights of all teachers, to reinstate teachers dismissed for exercising freedom of speech and to allow dismissed and retired workers to be members of a union. They also urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the re-registration of the KTU and to facilitate the registration of the KGEU. Moreover, they called on the Government to ensure that migrant workers were able, in practice, to change workplaces when subject to violations of the anti-discrimination legislation, that the legislation protecting migrant workers from discrimination was fully implemented and enforced and that migrant workers had access, in practice, to speedy complaints procedures and effective dispute resolution mechanisms. They also urged the Government to extend the scope of the labour law to the agricultural sector, where the majority of migrant workers employed under the EPS were working. They also urged the Government to take immediate measures to regularize the employment of non-regular workers, so as to eliminate employment discrimination against fixed-term, part-time, subcontracted and dispatched workers. This discrimination had a serious and lasting impact on workers’ wages, employment security and social protection, particularly for women workers. Lastly, they urged the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to ensure that the observations and conclusions of the supervisory system, which had been reiterated on repeated occasions, were adequately addressed, and that the offer of technical assistance was re-extended, if necessary.