 |
|
| ▲ Kim Mi-sook (center), the mother of the late Kim Yong-gyun, who had been fasting since the 11th of last month, urged the enactment of the Severe Disaster Act, disbanded the fasting campaign at the agricultural growth in front of the main building of the National Assembly after passing the National Assembly’s plenary meeting on the evening of the 8th. And crying. ⒸJoint interview photo 2021.01.08 | |
| Ⓒ Oh My News |
See related photos |
“Companies are now going to create businesses with fewer than 5 people, or run all subcontractors to less than 5 people. I’d love to’maybe’, but most of them have done that.”
Amid controversy, Professor Ha Jong-gang of the labor academy at Anglican University said that the Act on the Punishment of Serious Disasters (Severe Disasters Act) that passed the plenary session on the 8th was rather’presumed not.’ It was criticized that workplaces with less than 50 employees and those with less than 5 employees, which accounted for the majority of all workplaces, were suspended or excluded for three years, respectively, resulting in a “existing, but decent law.”Related Articles: Kang Eun-mi also cried, the bereaved family also cried… A serious disaster law that became an’uninvited guest’).
The government and ruling party’s towns and villages, which should also consider the situation of small business establishments, ordered to look back on past mistakes. A ruling party official has raised the claim that most of the workplaces with fewer than five employees are small business owners, taking the example of hardware stores and Chinese restaurants, and that there is a burden of aggravated punishment.
Professor Ha said in a conversation with the 9th, “It may be a burden to small business owners. (But) the government should prepare support measures to bear the burden.” “(Exclusion or suspension) has been done for decades, but the effectiveness is No. It is not’I can’t handle it, so let’s subtract’ it, but it is about strengthening our competitiveness so that we can handle it.’
Prof. Ha argues that the delayed’three years’ means that companies are only making time to find holes to avoid punishment, based on past experience. “The same sound came out when introducing the legal 40-hour week system,” he said. “Companies that make sales of several trillion won won’t be nervous at all. It’s because the penalties are never burdensome, depending on the size of the company.”
He also pointed out that the omission of the punishment clause for public officials was not fair compared to public corporations. Professor Ha criticized, “There is a punishment clause for public corporation workers acting on behalf of government functions, but not civil servants? It is not a correct legal principle.”
Professor Ha expressed disappointment, saying, “It is difficult to say that the enactment of the law alone is meaningful.” I will have to do it.”
Below is a summary of the interviews with Professor Ha.
“Is there any significance just by enacting the law? It is not effective”
 |
|
| ▲ Jong-Gang Ha, Head Professor of Labor Academy, Sungkonghoe University | |
| Ⓒ Lee Hee-hoon |
See related photos |
-The Major Disaster Act passed the plenary session on the 8th.
“It’s hard to say that’just the legislation is meaningful’. I think it is a law that is not effective. Workers and activists who promoted the enactment of the Severe Accident Enterprise Punishment Act, under the assumption that this law does not exist (formerly And) With the same determination, we will have to continue to exercise to protect workers’ health.”
-The reason I don’t think it works.
“Companies with many serious disasters were excluded (workplaces with less than 5 employees, 79.8% of all business sites) or suspended (workplaces with less than 50 employees, 98.8% of all business sites). We lost the opportunity to reduce the overall cost of our society. will be.
I think of the (Severe Accident Corporate Punishment Act) as a law only for workers, but it is a beneficial option for society as a whole. The time has already passed for companies to voluntarily invest in health and safety (of workers). (Industrial accident statistics) cover all types of occupations, including not only manufacturing and construction, but also office workers and service workers. It was a problem that applies to all office workers.”
-In the case of exclusion of workplaces with less than 5 employees, the government and ruling party take Chinese restaurants and hardware stores as an example, and argue that most of the workplaces are small business owners, and if punishment is aggravated, it is not in accordance with the national law judgment.
“It could be burdened by small business owners. Then (the government) should prepare a support plan to bear that burden. It is not to exclude or defer the application. It should be used where the tax will be spent. (Exclusions or suspensions) so far. This is the method that (government) has been implementing for decades.. What was the result? It wasn’t effective. It wasn’t’I can’t afford it, so let’s subtract’, but we need to strengthen our competitiveness so that we can handle it.
A company that says’if this law applies, it will fail’ should be honest. It is not beneficial to the national economy that marginal companies continue to persist. In fact, that is also the thorough principle of the market economy.”
-Are you saying that exclusion of the law cannot be considered a consideration for companies?
“It is not conducive to the competitiveness of the company in the long term. In fact, in the process of discussing related laws, the president of a construction company announced his intention to resign and said with the aim of what to do if all the responsibilities arising from hundreds of workplaces come to him. It should be correct. It is correct only if a manager who can bear (the responsibility) runs it.”
-For workplaces with less than 50 employees, the application was suspended for three years. It is intended to require a preparation period.
“Three years later, the situation remains the same. It was the same when introducing the 40-hour weekly legal working hours. Businesses and the economic press said the same thing even after the grace period. It starts three years later, but now the situation is the same. I’m not going to do any reinforcement measures for three years (businesses are safe). I need to do it and make it affordable.”
-There are also criticisms that the’penalty provisions’ have been structured to transfer responsibility.
“(Applicable to the law) companies will make all businesses with fewer than 5 employees, or all subcontractors with less than 5 employees. I doubt that, but most of the things that do’no way’ have been done by companies. I did everything I wanted to do. It’s not too much concern.”
-From a corporate standpoint, it is pointed out that it is difficult to be alert.
“In particular, large corporations that make sales of several trillion won in Korea will not be nervous at all. The amount of punishment will never be burdened in light of the size of the company. The US, a typical market economy society, has also developed a lot of punitive compensation systems. It calculates and imposes damages in proportion to its size. It is by no means a system that resists the market economy.”
“Severe Accident Act, the law that conglomerates will not be nervous at all… Promoting discrimination with law”
 |
|
| ▲ At a plenary session held at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul on the afternoon of the 8th, a bill on the punishment of serious accidents is being passed. | |
| Ⓒ Joint coverage photo |
See related photos |
-The punishment clause for public officials was also excluded.
“Ministries such as the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, and the Ministry of SMEs and Startups represent the position of companies. This is why legislations that increase the burden of business have always been frustrated. The same is true of the Industrial Safety and Health Act and the Act on Punishment for Serious Accidents. When the Ministry of Employment and Labor passed the State Council meeting, it retreated again when it passed to the National Assembly and discussed the Environment and Labor Committee or the Legal Justice Committee, because there are many channels representing companies in this process. I think it would have been difficult.”
-It is a criticism that both the public and the public cannot take responsibility properly.
“There were discussions about punishing individual public officials for job abandonment. However, in all major accidents, there have been few cases where public officials were punished for job abandonment. In contrast, there is still no liability penalty for public officials with licensing rights.”
-Are you saying it doesn’t fit in fairness?
“In the case of Korea Gas Technology Corporation, for example, if a gas accident causes a big fire, those with license rights are punished. There are penalties for public corporation workers who act on behalf of the government. But public officials are not (punishment). It’s not a good rule of law.”
-As a result, what does it mean to say that the opportunity to reduce the overall cost of society has been lost?
“(Korea’s) the death rate of workers is about 25 times higher than that of the UK, which has a corporate malpractice law as of 2015. The number of people who died in one year from Corona 19 was 1,000. Among the 18 million workers, one year industrial accidents. Korean workers are exposed to sites that are several times more dangerous than Corona 19. Since the introduction of the law, the UK has halved the actual industrial accident rate, and in one case, it is fined 250% of corporate sales. Although the company suffered a serious blow, it reduced the cost of society as a whole.
(The Severe Disaster Act passed this time) will be a classic example of the worst discrimination the state promotes.”