국민연금수급연령과 정년의 연계를 위한 고령자고용촉진법정책의 검토 ― 일본의 2013년 일본 고령자고용안정법시행과 우리나라 2013년 고령자고용촉진법 개정을 중심으로 ― (Review on Employment Promotion for the Aged Act that Encourages the Retirement Age's Connection with Age for State Pension -Surrounding Practice of Japan's 2013 Aged Employment Promotion Law and Korea)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국비교노동법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 노동법논총 / 31권 / 459 ~ 492페이지
· 저자명 : 이희성

초록

Although Korea practices the state pension system, the age for state pension has been heightened by decrease in income replacement rate that took place during the revision to resolve the insecurity of pension finance. In 2012, revision on“Prohibition of Discrimination on Age in Employment and Employment Promotion for the Aged Act (Employment Promotion for the Aged Act)”stipulated 60 as the retirement age, yet it is inevitable for many elderly people to experience blank in income. In general, almost every major developed countries tend to heighten the age for receiving state pension, search for the way to promote employment of the aged and connect the retirement age with the age qualified for receiving pension, to resolve insecurity of pension finance. However, it is hard to say that such law and policy that intentionally connects the retirement from the labor market with the age of receiving state pension exists in Korea.
Japan connected the end of employment with supply of pension through the 2012 revision on 「Aged Employment Promotion Law」. Initiated from 2013, the purpose of Japan's Aged Employment Promotion Law is to resolve the blank in income from the inclined age for pension supply, poverty problem and job insecurity that the aged experience due to aging. This implies that considering the speed of aging in Korea, we should also establish legal environment that secures people to work until 65, as Japan did through the introduction of retirement age expansion system. However, legalizing the expansion of retiring age to 65 like Japan might impose a burden on employers by decreasing the competitiveness of firms and generating generation gap surrounding young people and jobs. Unlike Japan, in Korea, the stipulated retiring age written on group agreements or employment rules is in many cases not kept, and introduction of ‘65 retiring age system’ might not work as effectively as it did in Japan. Involuntary retirement in early period such as voluntary resignation and resign from advice, and frequent reconstruction in firms are generalized in Korea, and job insecurity is continuing. Under such situation, the effect of the ‘legalization’ of 60 as an retiring age would be limited. Especially in current status where irrational seniority-based wage system that deepens the inconsistency between income and productivity is kept, the effect would be minimal.
To resolve such problem, strengthened link between the state pension law and Employment Promotion for the Aged Act is required. For stable income security for the aged, the retiring age should be expanded sequently from 61 to 65 based on the age for pension after the retiring age of 60, as in case of Japan. Also, on the one hand, we should support citizens by establishing diverse grants or funds through current employment stabilization project and introducing salary peak system. On the other hand, we should establish wage subsidy which is directly paid to the working elderly, and also establish pension for promotion of employment for the aged on the state pension law.
Also, in case of incumbent elderly employees, stipulating the retiring age should be obliged. At the same time, the existent seniority-based wage system should be revised into the wage system that reflects productivity, and diverse policies reconstructing labor supply system to promote employment should be established, to help settling the legalization of practical retiring age system.
In conclusion, Korea should not burden the next generation by adopting the system of Japan and managing public pension based on generational support, but should aim for “young, old balance” that does not assumes generational inequality.

영어초록

Although Korea practices the state pension system, the age for state pension has been heightened by decrease in income replacement rate that took place during the revision to resolve the insecurity of pension finance. In 2012, revision on“Prohibition of Discrimination on Age in Employment and Employment Promotion for the Aged Act (Employment Promotion for the Aged Act)”stipulated 60 as the retirement age, yet it is inevitable for many elderly people to experience blank in income. In general, almost every major developed countries tend to heighten the age for receiving state pension, search for the way to promote employment of the aged and connect the retirement age with the age qualified for receiving pension, to resolve insecurity of pension finance. However, it is hard to say that such law and policy that intentionally connects the retirement from the labor market with the age of receiving state pension exists in Korea.
Japan connected the end of employment with supply of pension through the 2012 revision on 「Aged Employment Promotion Law」. Initiated from 2013, the purpose of Japan's Aged Employment Promotion Law is to resolve the blank in income from the inclined age for pension supply, poverty problem and job insecurity that the aged experience due to aging. This implies that considering the speed of aging in Korea, we should also establish legal environment that secures people to work until 65, as Japan did through the introduction of retirement age expansion system. However, legalizing the expansion of retiring age to 65 like Japan might impose a burden on employers by decreasing the competitiveness of firms and generating generation gap surrounding young people and jobs. Unlike Japan, in Korea, the stipulated retiring age written on group agreements or employment rules is in many cases not kept, and introduction of ‘65 retiring age system’ might not work as effectively as it did in Japan. Involuntary retirement in early period such as voluntary resignation and resign from advice, and frequent reconstruction in firms are generalized in Korea, and job insecurity is continuing. Under such situation, the effect of the ‘legalization’ of 60 as an retiring age would be limited. Especially in current status where irrational seniority-based wage system that deepens the inconsistency between income and productivity is kept, the effect would be minimal.
To resolve such problem, strengthened link between the state pension law and Employment Promotion for the Aged Act is required. For stable income security for the aged, the retiring age should be expanded sequently from 61 to 65 based on the age for pension after the retiring age of 60, as in case of Japan. Also, on the one hand, we should support citizens by establishing diverse grants or funds through current employment stabilization project and introducing salary peak system. On the other hand, we should establish wage subsidy which is directly paid to the working elderly, and also establish pension for promotion of employment for the aged on the state pension law.
Also, in case of incumbent elderly employees, stipulating the retiring age should be obliged. At the same time, the existent seniority-based wage system should be revised into the wage system that reflects productivity, and diverse policies reconstructing labor supply system to promote employment should be established, to help settling the legalization of practical retiring age system.
In conclusion, Korea should not burden the next generation by adopting the system of Japan and managing public pension based on generational support, but should aim for “young, old balance” that does not assumes generational inequality.

참고자료

· 없음