전교조 법외노조 통보에 대한 소고: 해석 및 적용에 집중하여 (A Study on the Korean Teachers and Education Worker’s Union (KTU) ― Focused on Interpretation and Application ―)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 민주주의법학연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 민주법학 / 55호 / 153 ~ 176페이지
· 저자명 : 양승광

초록

이 글에서는 고용노동부가 전국교직원노동조합에 대해 행한 법외노조 통보의 정당성을 검토하였다. 현행 법을 ‘있는 것’으로 본다면 교원 노조의 가입 대상은 현직교원으로 한정된다. 이에도 불구하고 이 통보는 위법하다 보인다. 왜냐하면 통보의 근거가 된 노조법 시행령 제9조 제2항은 수권이 없는 위임명령으로 위헌 무효이기 때문이다. 설령 이 규정을 합헌이라고 볼지라도 법외노조 통보의 위법성은 치유되지 않는다. 노조법 시행령 제9조 제2항의 문언상 시정명령의 대상은 “설립신고증을 교부받은 후”에 “발생”한 사항인데, 이 사건의 대상인 전교조 규약 부칙 제5조는 전교조가 설립신고증을 교부받기 이전부터 존재했기 때문이다. 게다가 총 조합원이 6만여 명인 노동조합에 대해 9명의 해직자를 이유로 한 법외노조 통보는 과잉금지원칙에 위배된다. 해직자 9명으로 인해 노동조합의 자주성이 위태로워질 염려는 없기 때문이다.

영어초록

This thesis is about “extrajudicial union” notification of Ministry of Employment and Labor to the Korean Teachers and Education Worker’s Union(KTU). It is often regarded as Educational ideology problem with verification of Korean History textbook of Kyohak Publisher prior to the legal question. Because the problems in bylaws of the Korean Teachers and Education Worker’s Union have existed since it was established.
Related to this case, the biggest and continuous issue is that the Act on Teachers’ Union(ATU hererinafter) was legislated differently from the social agreement at that time. But, in this thesis, legislative theory is not included but it is more focused on its interpretation and application.
The beginning of argument started with the point that KTU’S bylaws addenda Article 5 is against or not to the Article 2. KTU Article 2 is actually similar to the Article 2 (4) d. Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act Article 5 is accepted KTU’s specialized legal points, the interpretation of Trade Union And Labor Relations Adjustment Act cannot be accepted as itself. And if when it is supposed that the company-level labor union through KTU is not accepted, only current teachers can be the target member through the second proviso of KTU Article 2.
However, “extrajudicial union” notification of The Ministry of Employment and Labor can not be justified for that reason. The ‘extrajudicial union’ notification is null and void. Because Article 9 (2) of the enforcement decree for the Union Act prescribing the notification can find no lawful ground of delegation in the Act itself and thus unconstitutional.
Even if the decree could be considered constitutional “extrajudicial union” notification about KTU remains illegal. The subjects of demand correction in Article 9 (2) of the decree are the points that occurred after a trade union has been delivered a certificate of report of establishment. However, in this case, Article 5 of KTU’s addenda was existed before a trade union has been delivered a certificate of report of establishment. Moreover, “extrajudicial union” notification due to the displaced 9 workers in 60,000 members of worker’s union is against to the principle of the prohibition of excessive restriction. The workers’ initiative cannot be weakened or in danger because of the 9 displaced workers.

참고자료

· 없음