미국 공공부문 근로자의 근로삼권 보장 법리와 대안적 분쟁해결(ADR) 절차 (Public Employees' Rights (Right to Unionize, Right to Collective Bargaining, Right to Strike and Concerted Activities) and ADR procedures in the United States)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국노동연구원
· 수록지 정보 : 노동정책연구 / 11권 / 4호 / 107 ~ 132페이지
· 저자명 : 강현주

초록

미국 공공부문 근로자의 근로삼권 보장 법리를 판례법까지 아울러 살피고, 대안적 분쟁해결절차가 근로삼권 보장 수위에 따라 달라져야 할 근거를 제시하는 점에 이 글의 독자적 의의가 있다. 공공부문 근로자의 단결권은 헌법상 권리라는 것이 미 연방대법원의 입장이다. 공공부문 근로자의 요구사항들은 대부분이 단체교섭의 틀로 해결되어야 하기 때문에 단체교섭권의 헌법상 권리성을 인정하여야 한다. 필수서비스 근로자를 제외한 공공부문 근로자의 파업권도 헌법적 보호 가능성이 높다. 조정, 사실조사, 변형된 중재 등의 대안적 분쟁해결절차는 근로삼권의 보장 수위에 따라 활용 종류가 달라져야 한다.

영어초록

While the U.S. Constitution does not specify the public employees the right to unionize, public employees' right to unionize is protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Right to unionize is a Constitutional right derived from the freedom of association, and employees in both the public and private sectors need not be treated differently.
In the United States, however, there still exists a fine line between the private and public sector, and public employees continue to experience restrictions in areas of subjects of bargaining, and right to strike and concerted activities. According to statutes and case laws, the right to collective bargaining, for example, may be viewed and affirmed as a Constitutional right, but what is rightfully considered so in the private sector still does not necessarily apply in the public sector. Moreover, not only have numerous states' efforts to protect public employees' concerted activities and their right to strike been unsuccessful, statues and case law both prohibit such activities.
Upon closer examination, however, 1) the right to collective bargaining should not be fully restricted but embraced and exercised by public employees as done by their counterpart in the private sector, and 2) strike and concerted activities may be restricted to employees in the so-called essential service sectors (e.g., law enforcement officers, fire fighters, policemen) where safety is at high risk.
Further, most jurisdictions that allow public employees the right to collective bargaining, but prohibit them the right to strike, resolve the impasse of the negotiation process through ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) procedures. Jurisdictions that give public employees the right to strike also require ADR procedures.
In jurisdictions that public employees have the right to strike, the ADR procedures mean mediation and fact-finding, which are not binding. Mediation and fact-finding are commonly used in the public sector rather than the private sector. Because of disfavor, interest arbitration is used for essential employees after fact-finding process. In the interest arbitration, the med-arb approach is preferred rather than the judicial decision-making approach, because advocates of med-arb regard interest arbitration as the extension of the collective bargaining process and shape the award to be acceptable to both parties.

참고자료

· 없음