본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

현행 남녀고용평등법의 간접차별 규정에 대한 비교법적 고찰

A Comparative Study On the “Indirect Discrimination” Under The Current Gender-Equal Employment Law

최윤희
한국사법학회 (The Korean Association of Private Law)|2006.03|비교사법 (The Journal of Comparative Private Law)|제13권 제1호|pp. 647-680

0

조회

0

다운로드

8

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

인과관계입증책임간접차별burden of proofaffirmative actioncausationindirect discrimination적극적 우대조치결과적 차별disparate impact주관적 고용기준통계 증거subjective employment criteriastatistical proof
주제분류법학

초록

Abstract

Article 2 of the Gender-Equal Employment Law of Korea, regulates that an employer discriminates against a man or woman if the employer applies a requirement or condition which is equally applied to each gender but (ⅰ) which is such that the proportion of any gender who can comply with it is considerably smaller than the proportion of the other gender who can comply with it, and (ⅱ) which the person cannot show to be justifiable irrespective of the gender of the person to whom it is applied, and (ⅲ) which is to detriment of the relevant gender because a person of the gender cannot comply with it. The definition of indirect discrimination under the Gender-Equal Employment Law is almost similar to that of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 of the UK, and the 78th Council Directive 2000 of EC, And, this notion of indirect discrimination has its roots in the notion of “disparate impact”, which was enacted by the 1991 Civil Rights Act of the USA, and which enactment is the result of the established precedents of the U. S. supreme court. In this thesis, I compared the indirect discrimination of the European Union　and the disparate impact theory of the U.S.A. in terms of the definition, scope of application including the matter of causation, burden of proof, subjective employment criteria, statistical proof, affirmative action, and also their theoretical limits. I tried to compare both scholastic and court opinions of the U.S.A. and EU, while trying to find out some guidelines for the future interpretation and modification of our Gender-Equal Employment Law.

참고문헌 (53)

  1. "노동법Ⅰ-개별적 근로관계법" (2005), 법문사
  2. "남녀고용평등법" (1994), 박영사
  3. "여성노동현안에 관한 국내외 판례의 동향과 과제" (2003)
  4. "남녀고용평등법 시행 10년의 성과와 과제" (1999)
  5. "간접차별판단기준을 위한 연구" (2002), 이화여대한국여성연구원
  6. "고용차별규제에 관한 법리(고용차별소송에서의 입증책임을 중심으로)" (1995)
  7. "고용차별규제법리의 가능성과 한계 -간접차별을 중심으로" (2003), 한국노동법학회
  8. "고용상의 성차별의 개념과 판단기준", (15) (2002)
  9. "Sex Discrimination" (1991), West Publishing Company
  10. "European Law-International Encyclopedia of Laws", Labor Law and Industrial Relations, 2003, ~[DOI]
  11. "Fair And Facially Neutral Higher Educational Admissions Through Disparate Impact Analysis", 9 (2004)
  12. "Disparate Impact Under Title Ⅶ An Objective Theory of Discrimination", 73 (1987)
  13. "A Theory of Fair Employment Laws" (1971)
  14. "Deconstructing Disparate Impact : A View of the Model through New Lenses", 74 (1996)
  15. "Defining the Proper Bounds of Disparate Impact Analysis Beyond An Obejective University of Pittsburgh Law Review", 49 (1988)
  16. "The Use Of Disparate Impact Analysis In Subjective Criteria Employment Discrimination Cases All That Glitters Isn't Gold?", 12 (1993)
  17. "and the Codification of the Disparate Impact Theory", 55 (1991)
  18. Ramadanah Salaam, "Adams v. Florida Power Corp.: Federal Circuits Disagree on the Validity of ADEA Claims Pursued under the Disparate Impact Theory of Liability, Recent Development Employment Law", 26 (2002)
  19. "Rethinking The Direct Evidence Requirement: A Suggested Approach In Analyzing Mixed-Motives Discrimination Claims", 86 (2001)
  20. "The Framework Directive For Equal Treatment In Employment And Occupation: An Analysis From A Disability Rights Perspective", 27(3) (2002)
  21. "The Charter Of Fundamental Rights Of The European Union And The Case Of Race Discrimination", 27(4) (2002)
  22. "Equal Treatment Between Persons Irrespective Of Racial Or Ethnic Origin: A Comment", 25(3) (2000)
  23. Catherine Farrelly, "Equal Pay And The Protection Of Women Within Family Life", 24(2) (1999)
  24. "Severance Pay For Part-Time Workers", 16
  25. "※참고 판례 및 결정례"
  26. "대판 1988. 12. 27. 선고 85다카657"
  27. "대판 1996. 8. 23. 선고 94누13589" (1996)
  28. "대판 2003. 3. 14. 선고 2002도3883" (2003)
  29. "대판 1993. 4. 9. 선고 92누15765"
  30. "헌재 1999. 12. 23. 선고 98헌마363" (1999)
  31. "사건번호 99고용17", 대통령 직속 여성특별위원회의 남녀차별결정사례
  32. "사건번호 00고용38", 대통령 직속 여성특별위원회의 남녀차별결정사례
  33. "Wanda L. Adams, et al. v. Florida Power Corp. et al, 255 F.3d 1322, 11th Circuit" (2001)
  34. "Katz v. Regents of the Univ, of Cal., 229 F.3d 831, 9th Circuit" (2000)
  35. "Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 9th Circuit" (2000)
  36. "Dorothy Kovacevich v. Kent State University, 224 F. 3d 806, 6th Circuit" (2000)
  37. "Virginia Arthur and Wendy Klepetar v. The College of St. Benedict, et al., 174 F.Supp. 2d 968, U.S. District Court District of Minnesota" (2001)
  38. "Adams v. Florida Power Corp., et al., 255 F.3d 1322, 11th Circuit" (2001)
  39. "U.S.A. v. State of New Jersey, New Jersey State Department of Personnel, et al. 88-5087(WGB)" (1995)
  40. "401 U.S. 424" (1971)
  41. Atonio v. Wards Cove Packing Co, "810 F. 2d 1477" (1987), 9th Ciruit
  42. "et al. v. Same and United Transportation Union Nos. 83-0514 and 85-0845" (1987), U.S. District Court District of Columbia
  43. "487 U.S. 977" (1988)
  44. "Inc. v. Atonio" (1989), 490 U.S. 642
  45. "457 U.S. 440" (1982)
  46. Pouncy v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, "668 F. 2d 795" (1982), 5th Circuit
  47. Rowe v. Cleveland Pneumatic Co, "690 F. 2d 88" (1982), 6th Ciruit
  48. Dothard v. Rawlinson, "433U.S.321" (1977)
  49. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, "490 U.S. 228" (1989)
  50. "R. v. Nicole Seymour-Smith and Laura Perez (Case C-167", 97) The Court of Justice of the E.C., 1999, ~
  51. "Regina v. Secretary of State for Employment, Ex parte Seymour-Smith and Another (Case C-167", 97) The Court of Justice of the E.C., 1999, ~
  52. "Julia Schnorbus v. Land Hessen (Case C-79", 77) The Court of Justice of the E.C., 2000, ~
  53. Case C33, "Maria Kowalska v. Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg The Court of Justice of the E.C. 1990"

관련 논문AI추천

남녀고용평등법의 실효성문제에 대한 고찰: ‘동일가치 노동동일임금’과 ‘차별의 정의’조항을 중심으로심재진민주주의법학연구회 · 민주법학2002 · 제22권 여성고용에 있어서 간접차별의 개념과 판단기준김수진, 김여선법과정책연구원 · 국제법무2011 · 제3권 제2호차별금지법(안)에 대한 검토와 비교를 통한 대안의 제시이준일안암법학회 · 안암법학2007 · 제통권 제25호현행 남녀고용평등법 하에서의 정년차별 문제 - 간접차별을 중심으로최윤희대한변호사협회 · 인권과 정의2006 · 제354호임신차별금지의 포괄성과 실효성이숙진한국여성학회 · 한국여성학2003 · 제19권 제3호노동법에서의 Gender-직장내 성희롱을 중심으로이철수법학연구소 · 법학논집2001 · 제6권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (20건)

醫療紛爭과 ADR김천수pp. 1-52가사조정제도의 문제점과 과제김원태pp. 53-84代案的 紛爭解決制度(ADR)의 經濟學조홍식pp. 85-160ADR을 통한 지적재산권분쟁 해결의 현황과 개선책이상정pp. 161-182노동분쟁과 대체적 분쟁해결방안박수근pp. 183-222
원문 보기