[노조] 기업엔 마법 같은 회사분할제도, 노동조합엔 ‘파괴수단’
함용남
경제
기사등록일 :
2020.04.06 13:02
A회사에는 1,000명의 노동자가 근무하고 있다. 모두 B노동조합에 속해있다. A회사와 B노동조합은 단체협약을 맺었다. 1년 후 A회사의 경영진은 회사분할제도를 단행했다. A회사를 A1회사(존속)와 A2회사(신설) 둘로 쪼갰다. 그런데 분할을 하면서 A1회사에는 노동자를 한 명도 남기지 않았다. A2회사에 노동자 1,000명을 모두 배치했다. 이때 노동자 1,000명은 A2회사에 다니기를 거부할 수 있을까? 즉 A1회사에 근무할 수 있을까? 또한 A회사와 B노동조합이 맺은 단체협약은 어떻게 될까?
Company A has 1,000 workers. All belong to the B trade union. Company A and trade union B have entered into a collective agreement. A year later, the management of company A implemented a company division system. Company A was divided into two companies, A1 (continued) and A2 (new). However, in the division, no workers were left in the A1 company. All 1,000 workers were assigned to the A2 company. At this time, can 1,000 workers refuse to attend company A2? In other words, can I work for A1 company? Also, what about the collective agreement between company A and trade union B?
현재 형성된 판례는 노동자에게 절망적이다. 일단 노동자는 군말 없이 A2회사에 다녀야 한다. 더불어 A회사와 B노동조합 간에 맺은 단체협약은 사라진다. 정확히 말해서 A회사와 B노동조합의 단체협약은 존속회사인 A1회사와 B노동조합으로 이전됐다. 하지만 A1회사에는 노동자가 한 명도 남지 않았다. 단체협약이 아무런 의미가 없다.
The current case law is desperate for workers. First, the worker must go to the A2 company without saying anything. In addition, collective agreements between the A and B trade unions disappear. To be precise, collective agreements between A and B trade unions were transferred to A1 and B trade unions. However, there were no workers left in A1. Collective agreements have no meaning. [정리 = 함용남 시사법률 크리에이터]
Company A has 1,000 workers. All belong to the B trade union. Company A and trade union B have entered into a collective agreement. A year later, the management of company A implemented a company division system. Company A was divided into two companies, A1 (continued) and A2 (new). However, in the division, no workers were left in the A1 company. All 1,000 workers were assigned to the A2 company. At this time, can 1,000 workers refuse to attend company A2? In other words, can I work for A1 company? Also, what about the collective agreement between company A and trade union B?
현재 형성된 판례는 노동자에게 절망적이다. 일단 노동자는 군말 없이 A2회사에 다녀야 한다. 더불어 A회사와 B노동조합 간에 맺은 단체협약은 사라진다. 정확히 말해서 A회사와 B노동조합의 단체협약은 존속회사인 A1회사와 B노동조합으로 이전됐다. 하지만 A1회사에는 노동자가 한 명도 남지 않았다. 단체협약이 아무런 의미가 없다.
The current case law is desperate for workers. First, the worker must go to the A2 company without saying anything. In addition, collective agreements between the A and B trade unions disappear. To be precise, collective agreements between A and B trade unions were transferred to A1 and B trade unions. However, there were no workers left in A1. Collective agreements have no meaning. [정리 = 함용남 시사법률 크리에이터]
