국민연금법상 양성평등의 실현과제
Equal Treatment of Men and Women in the Pension System of Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Formally women and men in Korea have the same rights at all points of law. Although both men and women have the same opportunity to acquire pension entitlements, the fact remains, that women still continue to be at a disadvantage in the acquisition of such pension rights. Women typically do not participate in the workforce for as many years as men. Due to societal gender roles, more women leave the work force to care for young children or elderly relatives. Because the pension law does not consider the gender of recipients when calculating their benefits, a man and a woman with identical work histories receive the same benefits. Yet gender neutral treatment by pension Administration results in significantly lower benefits for women because during their working years, women working full time receive about 62.3% for every dollar(Won) men earn. Despite an increasing number of women in the workforce, in addition, they remain concentrated in low-paying or part-time jobs, resulting in less earnings and benefits. This is, in part, a result of taking time off to care for families, which may result in fewer qualifications and lead to lower paying jobs. The older the women, the greater the earning gap. This lower earning power also decreases pension benefits. The Korean pension system has been slow to adopt provisions that compensate for inherent inequalities in the labor market. Throughout its history, social security has functioned as a wagereplacement program that links benefits to paid labor. The distinction between wage and non-wage labor generally works to the disadvantage of women relative to men, and it has led some scholars to view the invisibility of unpaid housework as the fundamental problem with the current system. The most accepted provision to compensate women for their interrupted work careers and low wages is to reward them with credit for care-giving. A recognition of the importance of women’s work would more accurately reflect women’ valuable contributions to the economy. Once formally recognized, society is likely to value nonmarket housework activities similarly to market activities, thereby entitling women to pension benefits that are currently tied only to waged labor in the market. Compensation for their interruptions of work for the purpose of child rearing does lead to the creation of personal entitlements, well adapted to the present evolution of social attitudes. However, the most serious inequalities affect those women who, because of a specific type of activity or because they do not engage in a gainful employment, are in a situation which is not comparable to that of men. Reduction of these inequalities presupposes changes in labor legislation and in legislation affecting the family. Social security cannot eliminate existing inequality in the sphere of work but it can contribute to its attenuation. And social security can remove part of the problem by not reinforcing traditional sex roles and by favoring a more equitable sharing of responsibilities through family policy measures that are equally available to both sexes.
Abstract
Formally women and men in Korea have the same rights at all points of law. Although both men and women have the same opportunity to acquire pension entitlements, the fact remains, that women still continue to be at a disadvantage in the acquisition of such pension rights. Women typically do not participate in the workforce for as many years as men. Due to societal gender roles, more women leave the work force to care for young children or elderly relatives. Because the pension law does not consider the gender of recipients when calculating their benefits, a man and a woman with identical work histories receive the same benefits. Yet gender neutral treatment by pension Administration results in significantly lower benefits for women because during their working years, women working full time receive about 62.3% for every dollar(Won) men earn. Despite an increasing number of women in the workforce, in addition, they remain concentrated in low-paying or part-time jobs, resulting in less earnings and benefits. This is, in part, a result of taking time off to care for families, which may result in fewer qualifications and lead to lower paying jobs. The older the women, the greater the earning gap. This lower earning power also decreases pension benefits. The Korean pension system has been slow to adopt provisions that compensate for inherent inequalities in the labor market. Throughout its history, social security has functioned as a wagereplacement program that links benefits to paid labor. The distinction between wage and non-wage labor generally works to the disadvantage of women relative to men, and it has led some scholars to view the invisibility of unpaid housework as the fundamental problem with the current system. The most accepted provision to compensate women for their interrupted work careers and low wages is to reward them with credit for care-giving. A recognition of the importance of women’s work would more accurately reflect women’ valuable contributions to the economy. Once formally recognized, society is likely to value nonmarket housework activities similarly to market activities, thereby entitling women to pension benefits that are currently tied only to waged labor in the market. Compensation for their interruptions of work for the purpose of child rearing does lead to the creation of personal entitlements, well adapted to the present evolution of social attitudes. However, the most serious inequalities affect those women who, because of a specific type of activity or because they do not engage in a gainful employment, are in a situation which is not comparable to that of men. Reduction of these inequalities presupposes changes in labor legislation and in legislation affecting the family. Social security cannot eliminate existing inequality in the sphere of work but it can contribute to its attenuation. And social security can remove part of the problem by not reinforcing traditional sex roles and by favoring a more equitable sharing of responsibilities through family policy measures that are equally available to both sexes.
참고문헌 (22)
- 국민연금관리공단, "국민연금법해설" (2001)
- 국민연금통계연보, "국민연금공단", ~ (2010)
- 권문일, "여성연금수급권 확충전략에 대한 국제 비교", 한국사회정책, 13, pp.229~253 (2006), 한국사회정책학회
- 김수완, "여성 사회권 관점에 의한 한국 연금개혁의 재구성", 한국여성학, 24(3), pp.147~176 (2008), 한국여성학회
- 김수완, "여성의 공적연금 급여수준의 국가간 비교 연구 : 한국, 미국, 스웨덴, 네덜란드, 독일을 중심으로", 사회보장연구, 21(1), pp.1~ (2005)
- 김용하, "국민연금 개혁의 쟁점과 대안 모색", 보건복지포럼, pp.84~ (2007)
- 남정림, "국민연금제도와 여성의 노후 빈곤", 여성문제연구, pp.1~ (1992), 대구가톨릭대학교 사회과학연구소
- 양육 크레딧 도입 방안, "유호선", 국민연금공단 국민연금연구원, ~ (2009)
- 이재희, "여성의 노후소득보장을 위한 국민연금제도의 개선방안", 한국생활과학회지, 13(4), pp.555~568 (2004), 한국생활과학회
- 정재훈, "국민연금제도 발전 방안에 대한 연구: 양성 평등적 관점에서의 비판적 분석", 한국사회복지학, 57(3), pp.31~50 (2005), 한국사회복지학회
- Adam, Hermann, "Soziale Sicherung" (1988), Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung
- Becker, Gary S., "A Theory of the Allocation of Time", Econ. J, 75, pp.493~ (1965)
- Bornstein, Laura C., "Homemakers and social security: Giving credits where creditsare due", Wisconsin Journal of Law, Gender & Society, (Fall), pp.255~ (2009)
- DiPasquale, Julia J., "Social security reform: keeping elderly women out of poverty", National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys Journal (2008)
- Forman, Jonathan Barry, "Social Security: What can be done about marriage penalties?", Southern California Review of Law and Women’s Studies, (Spring), pp.553~ (1997)
- ternational Social Security Association, "Eqaul treatment in social security" (1988)
- Knudsen, Per, "Equal treatment in social security", pp.107~ (1988)
- Liu, Goodwin, "Social security and the treatment of marriage: Spousal benefits, earnings sharing, and the challenge of reform", Wisconsin Law Review, pp.1~ (1999)
- M. L. Reig, "The unspoken poor: Single elderly women surviving in rural America", Elder Law Journal, 9, pp.257~ (2001)
- Staudt, Nancy C., "Taxing housework", Georgetown Law Journal, pp.1571~ (1996)
- Tamir, Yossi, "Eqaul treatment in social security", pp.93~ (1988)
- Zacher, Hans F., "Die Rolle des Beitrags in der sozialen Sicherung" (1980), Duncker & Humblot
