Hopes High for Improving Labor-Management Relations

Workers at Korea's three biggest automakers joined an industrial union Friday, creating the Korean version of the U.S.'s United Automobile Workers union. The conversion of company-based unions into parts of the Federation of Korean Metal Workers Trade Unions opens a new chapter in the nation's labor movement. This is a step forward in labor-management relationships, but it raises some concerns. The key lies in how to maximize the advantages of the new system and minimize the disadvantages.

The shift from company-based to industry-wide unions is a response to a changing environment. The percentage of unionized workers has been falling, and labor rules are becoming more flexible, as shown by the permission granted to one company to have multiple unions and banning employers from paying wages to full-time union officials. The sheer size of industrial unions will sharply enhance labor's negotiating power. The industrial organizations will also help to narrow the gap between unions of different sizes, crafts and occupations.

These advantages for unions, however, can turn out to be disadvantages for management. Under the centralized bargaining, labor disputes may reduce in number but increase in intensity and duration. If individual unions or sectional chapters conduct separate negotiations - very likely under the Korean situation - the costs of duplication may prove to be heavy. In addition, the enlarged unions will probably include not just economic but social and political issues as well in their negotiating agenda.

It is vital therefore for the major parties involved to pool their wisdom to effectively operate the new system. Industry-wide and company-based unions should be clear about the timing and contents of their respective negotiations, and the government ought to come up with a new, more advanced arbitration system. If necessary, the government should formulate most of these rules and practices into administrative decrees to reduce room for controversy. Unions also should take on more responsibility.

More important, however, is the mindset of employers. It is regrettable that the immediate reaction of some business associations and financial papers is about militant unionism. Such worries cannot be dismissed, but they could result in a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is true that labor in the United States and some European countries are returning to a company-based union system, but their operations and circumstances are quite different from ours.

The industrial union system has just begun in this country. At stake is how to minimize the costs of a turbulent labor-management relationship and attain industrial peace through persistent dialogue and compromise. Otherwise, the nation's industries cannot survive in this era of neo-liberalistic capitalism, marked by enhancing corporate and national competitiveness.