미국 노동분쟁의 ADR 절차와 시사점

Abstract

In South Korea, specific work procedures have not been established to activate the alternative dispute resolution before and after labor disputes in the relief procedure. In particular, there is no special law that can uniformly and consistently apply the alternative solutions to labor disputes, and the subjects, procedures, and contents of the application are scattered in the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act or the Labor Relations Commission Act. Nevertheless, the Labor Relations Commission actively participates from the collective bargaining stage, or the local labor commission leads the cooperation from the local governments to deploy the experts of alternative dispute resolution from the community. Therefore, in order for South Korea to actively introduce and revitalize the methods of alternative dispute resolution in labor cases, it is firstly necessary to establish the legal bases, procedures, and contents for the alternative dispute resolution.
 Therefore, this paper aims to derive implications after examining the ADR procedure in the case of unfair labor practices and employment discrimination in the United States. Firstly, the ADR procedure in the United States provides the legal basis in accordance with the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, a federal law. Specifically, the ADR procedures and contents of unfair labor practices and employment discrimination cases can be found through the Federal Code of Regulations. Secondly, the agency conducts the ADR procedures according to the work in charge of each agency. In other words, it means that the division of labor by agency is possible depending on the task in charge. Thirdly, the timing of the commencement for the ADR procedure is possible even before applications for unfair labor practices and employment discrimination relief are received. In other words, the ADR procedure may proceed at any stage before and after the issuing for relief. Fourthly, the ADR procedures are based on spontaneity, neutrality, confidentiality, and enforceability. Therefore, either party may withdraw the ADR at any time, and is left at the sole discretion of the party, without incurring any charges or expenses. Fifthly, the National Labor Relations Board has signed the agreement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to provide mediators, while the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission uses not only internal mediators but also external contract mediators. Sixthly, the Employment Equality Opportunity Commission enters into the universal mediation agreement with employers. In other words, the Employment Equality Opportunity Commission encourages employers to enter into the universal mediation agreement to utilize the mediation at the regional, local, or national level. Seventhly, the National Labor Relations Board's ADR reconciliation and withdrawal rate and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's adjustment resolution rate exceed 70%, so its effectiveness is excellent.