Back-to-Work Order: Outdated legal boundaries of the fundamental labour rights

Abstract

Solidarity Union (hereafter “TruckSol”) went on a national strike. Just after a few hours, President Yoon and the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport stated their intention to issue a ‘Back-toWork Order’ to the striking owner-truckers, violation of which carries heavy fines or prison sentences and revocation of licence for trucking transport service. On 29 November, the Korean Government actually issued the Back-to-Work Order to bulk-cement trailer drivers whose strike could disrupt construction work. Even before the strike, the Government has decried owner-operators’ collective action as illegal. The public authority has long maintained that owner-operators cannot do legitimate collective action as they are not “employees” under Korean labour laws. Moreover, the Government has directly cracked down on the strike of TruckSol since their collective action could disturb logistics in which large corporations have a dominant position. In this article, I explain legal and political debates over an “employee” under labour regulations in Korea. Further explanation about the criteria for the “legitimate collective action” under labour regulations will follow. In conclusion, I explore the implications of legal tools such as the Back-to-Work Order for suppressing freedom of association and the right to strike.