교섭대표 노조의 법적 지위와 공정대표의무의 내용 및 위반의 효과 - 서울중앙지법 2016.07.21. 선고 2014가합60526 판결을 대상으로 -

Abstract

It has been five years since the single bargaining channel system was introduced. The system is currently going to take root. However, there has been a lot of controversy over the single bargaining channel system. A typical example is legal status of minority trade union which is not a bargaining representative union. This ruling deals with legal status of bargaining representative union, duty of fair representation and effect of breach the duty. It is meaningful in that clarified the status of the bargaining representative union and the minority trade union. the court ruled that relation between bargaining representative union and minority trade union is not delegation and the bargaining representative union has separate, independent representative status. If the bargaining representative union has regulation that the progress by the union members’ vote to accept or reject collective agreement, the ruling is that representative union members have a right to vote. However in my opinion, minority trade union members also have the right. In addition, the court decided collective agreement which is in violation of the duty of fair representation is in claim for damages, not nullity. Finally, I can not agree with the Supreme Court's views on interpretation of collective agreement that is regarding to give bargaining representative union an exclusive status.