Sexual discrimination controversy sung by Dong-A Pharm.

“Some companies and public institutions are already paying low salaries to women who have not been in the military. These interview questions are controversial that these interview questions are sexist, but the point on reality is so bitter and bitter.”
Mr. A, a 30-year-old office worker, revealed his confusion while watching the recent controversy over sex discrimination during an interview with Dong-A Pharmaceutical. After joining the company, Mr. A learned that his male classmates have a higher salary than himself. Mr. A recalled that time, “I thought that I could recognize the length of my service in the military, but I was wondering that the value of work was evaluated differently while doing the same job in the same job.”

Mr. B, who said he was the victim of the sex discrimination interview at Dong-A Pharmaceutical, said on his personal blog on the 8th, “The head of the personnel team asked’What do you think about getting a lower salary than a man because he was a woman, so he did not go to the military.” In response, Dong-A Pharm wrote an apology and said, “There was no intention of gender discrimination,” but some responded that such a sexist remark is a reality.

Dong-A Pharm recognizes military experience, so male new recruits who have completed the military have a higher annual salary than unfilled male or female new recruits. However, if you become a manager, the new annual salary standard is applied. It is said that when women are exaggerated, the increase in annual salary is greater than that of men.

Traditionally, some conglomerates and financial sectors have recognized military careers as a top salary. However, recently, IT and media companies do not recognize military experience and apply the same wages to male and female new employees. It is said that it is because of the judgment that it can reduce costs and that the military service experience is not related to the job.

In light of the current law, whether to reflect the period of military service in the annual salary is a matter of choice for each company. Article 32 of the Constitution stipulates that “women’s work is subject to special protection and shall not be subjected to unjust discrimination in terms of employment, wages, and working conditions.” According to the Gender Equality Employment Act, employers are required to pay equal wages for work of equal value in the same business. Recognition of military experience is the basis for’reasonable discrimination’.

Park Ji-soon, a professor at the Graduate School of Law at Korea University, said, “The standard of equal value labor in the gender equal employment law is the skills, effort, responsibilities, and working conditions required for job performance. It was customary to admit it as “reasonable discrimination” under the constitution.”

The current Veterans Assistance Act recommends that “the period of military service can be included in the work experience”, but does not enforce it. When the amendment to the Veterans Assistance Act was proposed in 2019, according to a bill review report by the Political Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, the percentage of recognizing the mandatory service period as work experience was 89% for public institutions and public corporations, and 40.4% for private companies. Professor Park advised, “It is a matter for individual companies to judge whether or not to admit military careers, and it is not a problem that there is no compensation for the period of military service, but it is a problem that is excessive. Care should be taken not to lead to exhausting disputes between men and women.”

There have been debates in the past as well. In January, the Ministry of Strategy and Finance issued an official letter to improve the personnel system of’reorganization of gender discrimination regulations when promoted’ to public institutions. The discrimination against men in terms of the length of promotion by recognizing the second-class salary more is a judgment that violates the provisions of “no gender discrimination in education placement and promotion” under the Gender Equality Employment Act. The Ministry of Science and Technology stated that reflecting the duration of military service in the wage decision, but also reflecting it in the promotion screening, may result in redundant benefits. Online, some men protested, fearing reverse discrimination.

Mr. C, an employee in his 30s who received a higher salary than the female counterpart in recognition of his military experience, said, “I feel that I am receiving the minimum compensation for military service.” It seems to be a problem depending on the social atmosphere and the company’s choices, but there is an unavoidable aspect of the mentality of compensation for men’s military service.”

Some point out that it is necessary to think about the practice. Kwon Soon-won, a professor of business administration at Sookmyung Women’s University, said, “It was a practice to recognize military experience in the military service system, but at the time when a change in the wage system called the military service system is required, it is necessary to consider what the basis of the practice is logically.” “A productive discussion on career discrimination is possible only when we discuss how to accept the careers or experiences of unfilled men and how to generalize the corresponding opportunities.”

Reporter of Women’s Bureau [email protected]