The Enactment of the Educational Workers
Labor Union Act in South Korea:
Focusing on Discussion Within the Korean Teachers andEducational Workers Union

JUNG Sooyeon
１．Introduction
Through the enactment of South Korea s Act on the Establishment andOperation of Teachers Unions（below, Teachers Union Act）in January
1999, teachers basic labor rights were in part recognized, while the
Korean Teachers and Educational Workers Union （below, KTU）,
previously an

extralegal union,

was legalized as well. Previously, in

response to the application of Article 66 of the State Public Oﬃcials Act（ No public official shall engage in any collective activity for any labor
campaign, or activities, other than public services ）, teachers at stateschools without labor rights were guaranteed the right to organize andthe right to collective bargaining other than the right to collective action,with their position as workers 1 recognized.
The Teachers Union Act s purpose is explained in Article 1:

The

purpose of this Act is to prescribe matters concerning establishingteachers unions pursuant to the proviso to Article 5（1）of the Trade

This paper was originally published in Bulletin No. 46 of JEAS, and was translated into
English as a result of receiving the 2021 Research Encouragement Award.
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 141

Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act and prescribe special
exceptions to teachers, positioning it as a special law in the form of alabor union law on the establishment and operation of teachers labor
unions, rather than within the framework of laws on public oﬃcials suchas the Educational Officials Act 2 or State Public Officials Act or that oflaws on education such as the Framework Act on Education.
Elsewhere, it was previously possible in South Korea to form teachersorganizations in accordance with Article 15 of the Framework Act on
Education（ School teachers shall make eﬀorts to promote education andto advance culture in cooperation with［one］another, and they may form
teachers organizations at local governments and the central government
to improve teachers economic and social status ）; however, the only
legally recognized teachers organization was the Korean Federation ofTeachers Associations（below, KFTA）.3 Based on the Special Act on the
Improvement of Teachers Status（below, the Teachers Status Act）4, the
KFTA has conducted collective bargaining and consultation witheducational authorities5 since 1991, before the KTU was legalized. The
enactment of the Teachers Union Act had signiﬁcant eﬀects not only on
the aspect of ensuring teachers labor rights but on the situation
concerning teachers organizations. In short, conflict inevitably arose
between the KTU, which argues for the formation of labor unions, andthe KFTA, which advocates for

professional teachers organizations.

Further, the political aspect was also influenced by conflicting opinions
between the parties in power and the opposition parties6 as well as thepresident due to regime change. Discussion of the issue was complexlyintertwined with the political situation of South Korean society at the time.
The purpose of this paper is to focus on the enactment process of the
Teachers Union Act and to clarify why it was enacted as a special law,which is to say, why the KTU was forced into legalization via a special
142 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

law. Below, the relevant previous research is discussed and its limitations
conﬁrmed, and the issues of this paper stated.

２．Discussion of previous research
In Japan, with regard to teachers labor rights and labor movements,
there is considerable research on the case of teachers collective
bargaining in the US. These studies target the periods from the debate on
teacher militancy

in the 1960s through theunionization of

professionals, and point out with regard to the former, while positively
appraising the participation of teachers in administration and theirinvolvement in the policy-making process, that the closed collective
bargaining process led to theretention as the status quo of theprofessional bureaucracy. 7 Elsewhere, studies on the latter issue focus on
the changing relations of educational administration and teachersorganizations in the US of recent years, arguing that because teachers
professionalism and their rights as workers are indivisible, 8 the role
played by the collective bargaining system should be reevaluated. Thesestudies provide valuable information, as the US is similar to the case ofSouth Korea in many ways, including the inﬂuence on the guarantee ofteachers status of the law concerning workers, not public officials,9 andthe involvement in the core educational policy-making process of two
teachers organizations in pursuit of professional principles and labor union
ideals.10 However, with regard to collective bargaining alone, unlike theUS̶which has adopted

exclusive representation

̶South Korea

conducts collective negotiations with the KTU, based on the Teachers
Union Act （labor agreements）, and with the KFTA, based on the
Teachers Status Act（consultation）, separately.
Previous research within South Korea mainly focuses on this
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 143

dualizationof the collective bargaining system, discussing thecharacteristics of the negotiations conducted by each teachersorganization and pointing out their problems and limitations. For example,
the Teachers Union Act restricts collective bargaining to matters of the
improvement of teachers socioeconomic status, such as wages, working
conditions, and welfare, while the Teachers Status Act currently targets
only items on the improvement of treatment, conditions of employment,
welfare programs, and development of expertise of teachers; critics havenoted that in terms of negotiations, the KFTA and the KTU have noessential diﬀerences, and the systemic basis enforcing their separation is
weak. 11 As well, they propose as a solution the need for unifying theensuring of teachers basic labor rights in the Teachers Union Act. 12
Further, some studies argue from the aspect of the efficiency of
educational administration that

it is a considerable waste ofadministrative forces for the government to conduct double negotiations
with two organizations on the same matters 13 andit is a waste ofadministrative forces and budget for negotiations to be conducted
separately with similar teachers organizations, separated on the basis ofsocioeconomic status and professionalism. 14 However, preceding researchof this kind touches on the process of legislation only as an overview,
without focusing on why or how the law in question was established as a
special law. Therefore, it is limited to explaining labor unions andprofessional organizations within the same framework of teachersorganizations, and to trivializing the role of educational administration to
the improvement of eﬃciency in attaining educational goals.
Next, research touching on the enactment of the law refers to it as theresult of the difference between the teachers organization focusing on
professional principles and the teachers union pursuing labor union
principles 15 and the inﬂuence of the KTU and its excess emphasis on the
144 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

image of the teacher as worker. 16 However, this tone implies that
discussion within the KTU was a monolith, oversimplifying the process ofenactment of the Teachers Union Act. In short, there is no interest
accorded to the difference in attitudes toward the teaching profession
between the KTU and the KFTA, the changing discussion within the
KTU, or the clash of opinions between the parties in power and those in
opposition which was the key to the enactment of the law in question.17
Therefore, this paper discusses the clashing awarenesses and opinionsof the formation and legalization of the KTU among the Ministry of
Education, the various political parties, and the KFTA, while at the sametime analyzing the changing discussion within the KTU. Through thiswork, the paper clarifies the point that factors internal to the KTU
significantly affected the eventual

legalization as a special law.

The

analysis draws on the minutes of the National Assembly（1988-1998）as
well as journals and materials issued by the KTU and KFTA as held by
the National Library of Korea. As well, interviews were conducted with
KTU personnel 18 and required materials assembled.

３．The formation of the teachers labor union andthe response of the professional teachersorganization
３ １．Legal structures concerning the ensuring of teacherslabor rights
The discussion of teachers basic labor rights has taken place in tandemwith that of public officials basic labor rights; in South Korea, until theConstitution was revised by the military regime in 1962, there were in fact
no regulations restricting public oﬃcials three labor rights.19 The former
Constitution（enacted in 1947）specifies that all citizens shall have theright and the duty to work （Article 17）and that workers freedom of
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 145

association, collective bargaining, and collective action shall be guaranteed
within the scope of the law （Article 18）, guaranteeing the three laborrights to all workers, including public oﬃcials.
However, the 1962 revision of the Constitution by the military regime
stipulated that all public oﬃcials shall be servants of the entire people
and shall be responsible to the people （Article 6.1）and the status andthe impartiality of a public oﬃcial shall be guaranteed in accordance withthe provisions of law （Article 6.2）
, specifying that the status of publicoﬃcials was as servants of the entire people. As well, while specifyingthat workers shall have the right of independent association, collective
bargaining and collective action for the purpose of improving theirworking conditions （Article 29.1）, the Constitution adds that the right ofassociation, collective bargaining and collective action shall not be
accorded to the workers who are public officials except for thoseauthorized by the provisions of law （Article 29.2）, eﬀectively restricting
the basic labor rights of public officials, with the exception of thoseregulated by Article 66 of the State Public Oﬃcials Act.20 Similarly, the1963 revision of the Labor Union Act（enacted in 1953）stipulates thatworkers shall have the freedom to form labor unions and to join these
unions, excluding public oﬃcials whose rights are regulated elsewhere inlaw,

restricting the basic labor rights of all public officials, with the

exception of those belonging to the Korean National Railroad or the
National Medical Center.
Thereafter, the military regime came to an end and the Constitution
was once again revised in 1988, the year of the first direct presidential
elections. However, the revised Constitution included no changes to thebasic labor rights of public officials, specifying that only those public
officials who are designated by Act shall have the right to association,collective bargaining and collective action （Article 33.2）, guaranteeing, as
146 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

before, only a given subset of public oﬃcials the basic labor rights.

３ ２．Conﬂict over the legal status of teachers⑴

The movement toward formation of a teachers labor union
The movement throughout South Korea in opposition to the military

regime influenced the foundation of the South Korea YMCA Secondary
Educators Conference （1982）, the forerunner of the KTU, and the
movement toward democratizing education. The Conference explained its
new theory of teachers

in the journal Minju Kyoyuk（ Democratic

21
Education）, published in 1985, as below.

First, the article addresses the theory of professionals as the theory ofteachers generally accepted within the academic and educational spheres,
stating that the view of professionals is at risk of regulating teachers as aprofessional interest group, narrowing the scope of the problems of whichteachers should be aware in themselves, lowering their socioeconomic
status, and eventually reducing the deprivation of their ideological andpolitical autonomy to nothing more than a lack of professionalism. 22 As
well, it points out the error in considering the aspect of

ensuring

professionalism as simply a change in teachers ideological and politicalroles, preventing the objective clarification of the problem of theirsocioeconomic status. 23 Next, because the role of the people as subject
and the subjective and autonomous role of the teachers entrusted
therewith have not been tolerated,

the article criticizes the fact that

South Korean society so far has been able to achieve only the role not asteachers of the people, but as teachers of the state, an existence
thoroughly infusing education with the political and ideological intent ofstate authority. 24Thistheory of teachers

obtained wide awareness in the state of

Korean society at the time.25 It is clear that they were aware of the
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 147

contradictions of bureaucratic education and the political situation, evenwhile possessed of the status of public officials, and calling for an
independent labor movement

to resolve this. Further, the phrasing

implies recognition of the limitations of the Conference, a privateorganization, and a focus on the formation of a nationwide unified
organization. Thereafter, the organization continued its activities whilechanging its name to the Conference for the Practice of Democratic
Education （1986） and the National Teachers Conference for the
Promotion of Democratic Education（1987）. As well, it argued for therevision of the Labor Union Act and developed the educational labor
movement toward the formation of a legally recognized national labor
union.
⑵

The response of the professional teachers organization
In response to the movement to form a teachers union, the first to

move was the KFTA（then the Korean Education Association）,which had
until then been the only teachers organization. Established through thesupport of the 1947 US military regime, when South Korea was under US
Army control, the KFTA has been criticized repeatedly as aorganization

lackey; when the KFTA withdrawal movement 26 arose in 1988,

centered on teachers arguing for labor union formation, a serious
discussion of intraorganizational reform began. The KFTA, alarmed at therisk to its very existence, hurriedly issued an Analysis of the Situationand Measures in Response

in June of the same year, including thefollowing plan: Rupture in the society of teachers is a factor hampering theimprovement of teachers status, and as such the KFTA promotes theintegration of a labor union under the auspices of the KFTA 27（emphasis
added）. However, as this was highly unfeasible in practice, the KFTA wasto continue with reforms to its internal culture. In fact, criticism wasincreasing from within on the manager-centered operation and the gap
148 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

between organizational operation and members, leading to thedetermination that operation directionality would take as its objectives
the rejection of the name of lackey, and operation as a member-centered,democratic professional teachers organization. 28⑶

Promotion of the enactment of the Teachers Status Act by

the KFTA
The strategy adopted by the KFTA regarding the formation of the
KTU extended not only to internal reforms but to the promotion of theenaction of the Teachers Status Act, regulating the status of teachers（ organizations）in law. The KFTA issued a comment stating that withdeep reflection on its political subjugation to date, this Association will
establish new aspects as a teachers organization and will take a multifaceted approach to the enactment of a Teachers Status Act eﬀectively
improving the socioeconomic and political status of teachers. 29
Notable here is that, while positioning themselves as a professional
teachers organization, they included in the bill an item on collective
bargaining and consultation with the Ministry of Education.30 The KFTA
named the ensuring of the right to collective bargaining as an importantcondition for the improvement of teachers status, mentioning theparticipation of teachers in education-related decision-making as well as
the installation of an arbitration and mediation mechanism for ensuring
and putting into effect the right to collective bargaining of teachersorganizations, which may be said to be a core element in the improvement ofteachers’status 31（emphasis added）. Elsewhere, they added that

there

should be no confusion with the right to collective bargaining as one of thethree labor rights, 32 suggesting the effort to shake off the image of alackey organization by obtaining the right to collective bargaining while
distinguishing themselves from labor unions. This may also be considered
the inﬂuence of the movement toward formation of the KTU.
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 149

３ ３．Clashes in views of the teaching profession with regard
to ensuring teachers labor rights
Discussion in the National Assembly more or less simultaneously
addressed the Labor Union Act revision bill recognizing teachers threelabor rights, including that of forming unions, and the enactment of the
Teachers Status Act promoted by the KFTA. This section examines thediscussion taking place at this period among the Ministry of Educationand the parties in power and in opposition and conﬁrms which view of
the teaching profession took precedence with regard to the ensuring ofteachers labor rights.
⑴

Clash of opinions on the Labor Union Act revision bill
In March 1989, the National Assembly s Labor Committee submitted abill revising the Labor Union Act33 so as to ensure public oﬃcials laborrights. This included an item to the eﬀect that the rights of public oﬃcialsof grade 6 and below 34 to join labor unions and conduct collective
bargaining shall be recognized,

opening the way to the ensuring ofteachers labor rights. In response to this bill, the Ministry of Education35
stated that because public oﬃcials are responsible for selﬂess service tothe people and have the duty to maintain political neutrality and dignity, it
is diﬃcult to recognize the same three labor rights therefor as for ordinary
workers, rejecting the formation of the KTU on the grounds that given
the status of public oﬃcials in the Constitution, a teachers union would
be not only in violation of existing laws, but also inappropriate as anorganization in teachers society. 36 As well, they stated We［the Ministryof Education］view the teaching profession as a specialist profession, andare moving in the direction of recognizing the rights to association andbargaining of professional organizations, 37 suggesting their preparation torecognize collective bargaining with the KFTA, billing itself as aprofessional organization, alone. That is, they moved toward recognizing
150 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

the KFTA s Teachers Status Act bill and preventing the formation of the
KTU. At the same time, they stated that our traditional view of teachers
is that they must be morally respected by students and society, possessing
a thorough sense of mission and philosophy toward education as well as
academic expertise and character, 38 displaying a view of the teachingprofession similar to that of holy orders.39

Change of stanceProfessionals

KFTA: Educational
professionals

New Democratic Republican
Party (opposition):
Ensure two labor rights toimprove social status
Reformminded

Ministry of
Education: Holyorders
Democratic Justice Party (inpower):
Ban on teachers’ labor activities

New Democratic Republican
Party (opposition):
Restraint in KTU activities
Conservative

Reunification Democratic
Party (opposition):
Ensure two labor rights
Peace Democratic Party(opposition):
Ensure three labor rights

Peace Democratic Party(opposition):
Ensure two labor rights

KTU: Educational workers

Reunification Democratic
Party (opposition):
Restraint in KTU activities

January 1990
Party in power + 2 opposition partiesĺGiant party in power (Democratic Liberal Party)

Workers

Figure: Shifts in views on KTU formation of the parties in power and in
opposition（created by the author）

Next, the party in power（the Democratic Justice Party）rejected theensuring of public oﬃcials labor rights to the eﬀect that public oﬃcials
are servants of the people as a whole, with their status ensured by special
relations of authority, and thus their labor relations issues cannot be
handled in the same way as employees of private enterprises. 40 As well,they evidently took the same stance as the Ministry of Education:
Tolerating labor union activity including public oﬃcials of grade 6 andbelow and teachers would cause numerous problems regarding the stable
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 151

performance of state duties; the time has not yet come for this step, given
the current status of South Korea. 41
Elsewhere, the opposition parties opinions were more diverse. The
three opposition parties constituting the mainstream among National
Assembly seats were split among a passive stance on teachers union
formation（the New Democratic Republican Party）, a stance arguing for
ensuring labor rights through the teachers organization rather than alabor union（the Reuniﬁcation Democratic Party）, and a stance in supportof ensuring the right to association and collective bargaining in the form ofa teachers union（the Peace Democratic Party）.42 At the time, the politicalsituation was skewed toward the parties in opposition and away from theparty in power, which was fortuitous for the teachers union, and theLabor Union Act revision bill would have passed（151 in favor, 126 against,
and 7 abstaining of 284 seats）, but for the ﬁnal veto at the presidential
level. As well, thegiant party in power

created by the subsequentchange in the political status quo（January 1990）caused each party totake a more conservative stance, making the legalization of the KTU evenmore diﬃcult.
⑵

Measures taken by the KFTA and the establishment of the

Teachers Status Act
Elsewhere, the KFTA was making further eﬀorts toward the enactmentof the Teachers Status Act, holding policy discussion meetings with thegiant party in power and calling on the President.43 Yun Hyeon-seop, the
KFTA president at the time, argued thatteachers status must be

suitably privileged so as to enable teachers to devote themselves to
education with a sense of mission, emphasizing in particular that teachers
themselves preserve their ethics as educators. 44 As well, he pointed outthat in recent years, the disturbance and conﬂict in a part of teacherssociety is one cause of their unsettled status and interests, 45 referring
152 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

obliquely to the movement of the time toward the KTU and indicating
alarm.
In 1990, the leader of the party in power revealed a plan to enact the
Teachers Status Act within the year and a policy recognizing thecollective bargaining and consultation proposed by the KFTA.46 The party
in power gave a statement expressing their positive opinion of the law as
a legal system with consideration given overall to the status and role ofteachers as professionals, the cultural and social value consciousness ourcountry has traditionally accorded to teachers, and the public nature of
education. 47 Elsewhere, the opposition pointed out that allocating theauthority of collective bargaining to the KFTA alone would be simply
confirming that the KFTA is the only legal［teachers ］organization,
rendering illegal all other educational organizations including the KTU,
criticizing the law on the grounds that it would violate Article 11 of theConstitution, which speciﬁes that all citizens shall be equal. 48 However,with the party in power holding a majority of seats in the National
Assembly, the Teachers Status Act was passed（with 168 votes in favor,
56 against, and 1 abstention out of 225 seats）.

４．KTU policy change and legalization⑴

Conﬂict and change within the KTU
When the revised Labor Union Act did not pass into law due to thepresidential veto, the KTU formed as an

extralegal union.

Opinions

within the organization at this time were apparently divided, including
both the union should convert itself to a legal format by removing theword labor, becoming the Teachers Union or the Democratic Education
National Teachers League 49 andthe labor movement must continue

until legalization is realized through revision of the Labor Union Act . 50
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 153

The former argument called for the construction of a legal teachersorganization focusing on mass appeal. The latter group, mainly executive
members, criticized this opinion: Dismantling the labor union, the main
unit of the labor movement, and creating a diﬀerent organization would be
not simply a strategy for legalization but a problem potentially demanding
full-scale revision of the movement s character and direction. It would
mean creating a second KFTA, abandon the basic labor rights andchanging the direction of the movement. 51 The union s representative
council held a vote on the issue, adopting the executive members opinion
by the narrowest of margins.52 While on the face of it this clash of opinions
appeared to be a difference in perception of the legalization of theorganization, it hints at a dilemma even within the KTU, which had
continued to push for legalization through a full revision of the Labor
Union Act , regarding the view of the teaching profession and theeducational labor movement which it had pursued to date. The
organization s identity was wavering, torn between whether to remain alabor union even under legal restrictions or to shift to a professionalorganization in the form of a corporate body. This problem was to comeunder debate over and over within the KTU.
Further, when collective bargaining between the Ministry of Educationand the KFTA began, the KTU put into motion a new strategy for its
legalization. In 1994, they set the objective ofachieving effective

organizational legislation through the formation of expanded popular
appeal and advantageous political conditions 53（emphasis added）, suggestingthat they were willing to use the political situation to create anenvironment advantageous for legalization. That is, the establishment of
the Teachers Status Act had a significant influence on the changing
organizational objectives and policy of the KTU.

154 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea⑵

The alternate proposal of the Presidential Commission on
Industrial Relations Reform
In 1996,as the issue of a new labor relations structure came to the fore

during South Korea s preparations to join the OECD, the Presidential
Commission on Industrial Relations Reform began once again to work on
revising the Labor Union Act. 54 The Commission s opinion was thatregarding public officials, teachers, and so forth, while their basic
interests as workers are to be respected, concerns regarding theobligations to society inherent in their positions call for exploration ofrational labor relations,adding thatregarding teachers, guarantees

should go as far as their collective bargaining rights. 55 Speciﬁcally, as apolicy method of legalizing teachers unions, they offered a proposal
recognizing the right to association of separate workers organizations towhich the Labor Union Act was not applicable（Proposal 1）and anothermaintaining the current legal system and multiplying the extant
professional teachers organizations （Proposal 2）. Neither would
completely ensure the three labor rights, as the KTU hoped, but both led
to discussion on acceptance within the KTU. The discussion, whichapparently focused mainly on Proposal 1, turned on the issue of whether
ensuring the rights to association and to collective bargaining through aspecial law would be equivalent to the basic labor rights.
Those in favor of the Commission s proposal, while admitting that it isa fact that the rights to association and collective bargaining obtained
through a special law would be more limited than the basic labor rights（based on the Labor Union Act）
, argued that

the Commission s

proposal reﬂects the limits of the KTU s capacity, and could become an
opportunity for new qualitative development of the educational movementin the sense of ensuring conditions promoting popular development of the
movement. 56 Elsewhere, those opposed to the Commission s proposal 57
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 155

held that arguing for legalization via a special law or some other law isbased on the intention to restrict rights, perceiving the risk of legal
restrictions on labor union activities overall, such as the organizationaltargets, scope, negotiation methods, selection of negotiators, negotiation
conditions and so on with regard to the teachers union. 58
This internal debate did not make itself known outside the KTU. Before
the debate could become serious, the Presidential Commission on
Industrial Relations Reform was disbanded and discussion on thelegalization of the KTU came likewise to a stop for the moment. However,when we consider that it was ultimately through a special law related to
the Labor Union Act

that the KTU was legalized, it seems that thevoices arguing for the ensuring of two labor rights through a special law,
accepting the Commission s proposal, held a stronger position within theunion.
⑶

The ﬁnal proposal and the passing of the special law
With the disbandment of the Presidential Commission on Industrial

Relations Reform, the KTU, having failed at legalization, approached thesubsequent presidential election as

an important opportunity

to tryagain, deciding on a basic policy ofenhancing the public sphere ofactivity in schools in order to reinforce the popular foundation of KTU
legalization. 59 For example, they released a popular opinion survey on the
problem of KTU legalization within educational reform,60 putting pressure
on the political parties and presidential candidates which had reserved
opinion on the formation of a teachers union. When Kim Dae-jung of the
opposition parties was elected president and the regime changed
accordingly in 1997, the KTU was provided with a good chance atlegalization.61 From this period on, the Ministry of Education began to takea more ﬂexible stance, in response to the OECD s forceful demands thatits member countries negotiate with labor unions at the national level.62
156 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

In response to the creation of the new Tripartite Commission, apresidential advisory body, the KTU held serious internal debates on thestandards and methods of legalization, with the gradually spreadinginternal awareness that the realistically possible standard for legalizationis the ensuring of the two labor rights through a special law related to the
Labor Union Act. 63 At the national executive training held in January
1998, a proposal for obtaining status as a legal organization with the twolabor rights ensured was submitted, to the eﬀect that as the early daysof a new administration are the ideal time for legalization, we will
postpone the complete acquisition of all three labor rights, negotiating andﬁghting actively to enable legalization ensuring the rights to associationand collective bargaining（the two rights）. 64
The plan for legalization via enactment of a special law through the
Tripartite Commission, specifying that the formation of teachers unions
would be ensured through this enactment and that the rights to
association and collective bargaining, though not collective action, would
be recognized, was submitted to the National Assembly on October 31,
1998. Thereafter, the Teachers Union Act

went through the National

Assembly s Environment and Labor Committee and was passed on
December 29, leading to the enactment described at the beginning of thispaper.

５．In lieu of a conclusion
Above, this paper has discussed the process leading to theestablishment of the Teachers Union Act in South Korea and analyzed,
with a focus on discussion within the KTU, why this law was established
as a special law. The following three points have thus been made clear.
First, the KTU and the KFTA were constantly inﬂuencing one another.
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 157

For example, the formation of the KTU forced the KFTA to embark on
internal organizational reforms, attempting to lose its image as a lackeyorganization through collective bargaining and consultation. Likewise, theKTU was inﬂuenced by the Teachers Status Act, pushed through by the
KFTA. Its establishment led to the questioning of the need for collective
bargaining as a labor union, while at the same time causing the KTU toshift its policy toward creating a political climate advantageous tolegalization while distinguishing itself from a professional teachersorganization.
Second, the legalization of the KTU brought about not only internal
debate therein but also changes in the views of the teaching profession
held by the Ministry of Education and the KFTA. The Ministry of
Education had focused on the law-abiding spirit in its view of teachingfrom the earliest days of the KTU, but in the late 1990s, it began torecognize a certain degree of teachers labor rights in accordance withinternational standards. The KFTA likewise, while advocating for
professional teachers organizations, changed after the formation of the
KTU so as to argue for the acquisition of the practically eﬀective right tocollective bargaining. In short, the early days of the formation of the KTU
involved a gradual tendency toward compromise on views of the teachingprofession on the part of the organizations generally considered to havebeen in ﬁerce conﬂict therewith.
Third, as noted above, the KTU and the KFTA shared close positions
regarding the recognition of teachers labor rights, but perceived theright to collective bargaining diﬀerently. In short, the KTU s view of
ensuring labor rights was that teachers independent right to association
would be ensured without legal restrictions, as any negotiation under the
restriction of laws on education could not take place on equal footingwith the educational authorities. 65 Therefore, the right to collective
158 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

bargaining

as a teachers organization

promoted by the Ministry of

Education and the KFTA was meaningless in the KTU s terms. This
point is thought to be the reason why, even while forced into realistic
compromise, the KTU rejected the special law applying only to teachers
all the way, and why the law s establishment was thus based onaspecial law related to the Labor Union Act. Here we see the peculiarityof the teachers union and what brings it within the scope of educational
administration studies. From its time as a voluntary association, the KTU
had positioned teachers not as ordinary workers but on a par with the
Ministry of Education. This differed from the KFTA s perspective,emphasizing teachers duty to be politically neutral as trustees of public
duty. 66 The dualization of collective bargaining criticized in previous
research was due to this discrepancy in views of the teaching profession
between the two organizations, which made it difficult to bring them
together as one on this point.
Finally, there are some issues left unaddressed by this study.
First, when discussing the problem of ensuring teachers labor rights,
the discussion must address the issue of how the relationship between
educational organizations（including parents groups, citizens groups, etc.）
and teachers organizations has changed and how this has inﬂuenced thesocial status of teachers unions and organizations. Next is the issue ofanalysis of the collective bargaining between the educational authorities
and teachers organizations after the establishment of the Teachers UnionActand examination of its eﬀectiveness, comparing the actual content of

the right to collective bargaining of the KTU and the KFTA toward a
deeper consideration of the ensuring of teachers labor rights.
As well, from the perspectives of teachers legal status and the ensuringof their labor rights, the views on the teaching profession of various othercountries must be organized and their commonalities and differences
日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 159

clariﬁed. It is thought that the outcomes of this paper can be developed
into international comparison, a point to be addressed in the future.
（Kyushu University）

1

Ko Jeon A Study of the Issues & Tasks on the Legislation of the Teachers
Union, in Studies in Educational Administration Vol. 17 No. 3, Korean Educational
Administration Society, 1999, p. 198.

2

South Korea s Educational Officials Act regulates teachers qualifications,
appointment, remunerations, education and training, and guarantee of status,
but does not provide separately for their labor rights.

3

The Ministry of Education previously interpreted this article as permitting
one central and one regional teachers organization to be formed, recognizing
only the KFTA as a teachers organization（Park Jong-bo,

Constitutional

Issues on the Legal status of Teachers Associations, in Studies on Educational
Law Vol. 8 No. 2, 2006, p. 129）.
4

The law was revised in 2016 as the Special Act on the Improvement of
Teachers Status and the Protection of their Educational Activities.

5

This collective bargaining was conducted with the central Ministry of
Education and regional education governors, similar to the heads of prefecturalboards of education in Japan; from 2006 on, this position has been elected
through direct regional elections, based on an amendment of the Local
Autonomy Act.

6

Through the struggle for democracy in June 1987, South Korea ﬁrst realized
direct presidential elections; administrations since then have included Roh
Tae-woo s presidency in 1988 and Kim Young-sam s（civilian government）
in 1993. In 1998, after the ﬁrst party regime change since the colonial era,
Kim Dae-jung became president.

7

Ota Haruo, America ni okeru kyoin kumiai to kokyoiku tochi: Kyoin dantai
kosho no kosatsu wo chushin to shite（Teachers unions and public education
governance in America: Focusing on a discussion of teachers collective
bargaining）, in Hikaku kyoikugaku（Comparative Education）Vol. 14, 1988, p. 73.

8

Takahashi Satoshi, Beikoku kyoin kumiai no senmonshoku dantaika shisaku

160 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

no bunseki: NEA/AFT no doryo kyoin shien hyoka wo chushin ni（Analysisof measures converting American teachers unions into professionalorganizations: Focusing on NEA/AFT peer assistance and review program）,
in Nihon Kyoiku Gyosei Gakkai Nenpo（Bulletin of the JEAS）Vol. 31, 2005, p.164.
9

Takahashi Satoshi,

Beikoku ni okeru kyoiku rodo ho seido kaikaku nobunseki: Michigan-shu komu koyo kankei ho no kaisei mondai（An Analysis ofLabor Law Reforms in America Public Education: Focusing on the
Amendment of the Michigan Public Employment Relations Act）
, in
Kyoikugaku kenkyu（Educational Studies）Vol. 76 No. 3, September 2009, p. 14.
10

Ota, op. cit. p. 70.

11Jung Gi-oh, Treaties and Some Weaknesses of Teacher Union Law: Collective
Bargaining in Education Background and Performance, in Korean Journal of
Teacher Education Vol. 22 No. 4, Korea National University of Education
Graduate School, 2006, p. 96.

12

Lee Il-kweon, Critical Point of View on the Issue of the Teachers Union Act:
Focusing on Teachers Basic Labor Rights,

in Studies in Educational

Administration Vol. 21 No. 4, Korean Educational Administration Society, 2003, p.
256.
13

Seo Jeong-hwa & Hwang Seok-geun, Limitations & Possibilities of Teacher
Collective Bargaining in Korea, in South Korea Teaching and Education Studies
Vol. 18 No. 3, 2001, p. 75.

14Ko, op. cit. p. 211.

15

Jung, op. cit. p. 96.

16

Korean Federation of Teachers Associations, New Education, October 1998, p.
170.

17

Elsewhere, attention is required to historical studies of the Japan Teachers
Union. In particular, called upon by issues with the revision of the National
Public Service Act to choose between the status of professionals and that ofworkers, the research of Tokuhisa（2020）is highly suggestive in its depictionof the internal dilemmas and conflicts as well as the influence of theprofessional responsibility of

democratization

suited to the situation in

Japanese society at the time（Tokuhisa Kyoko, Hoteki chii no henka to sono
eikyo（Changing legal status and its influence）, in Hirota Teruyuki ed.
Rekishi toshite no Nikkyoso（The JTU as history）Vol. 1, Nagoya University Press,

日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 161

2020, pp. 159-190）.
18

The interview survey was conducted on October 9, 2019, for two hours at theoﬃce of the Korean Teachers and Educational Workers Union Seoul Branch.

19

However, based on Article 6 of the Labor Union Act enacted in 1953, the laborrights of certain public oﬃcials such as the military, the police, and ﬁreﬁghters
were restricted（KFTA, ［Project Diagnosis］Teachers Labor Rights,

in

New Education, November 1998, p. 76）.
20

Ibid., p. 73.

21

YMCA Secondary Educators Conference, Democratic Education Vol. 10, 1985,
pp. 16-18.

22

Ibid., pp. 16-17.

23

Ibid., p. 17.

24

Ibid., p. 17.

25

According to Otsuki（1992）, as the movement demanding democracy
expanded nationwide in opposition to the military regime, from the early 1980s
on, mainly among teachers involved with the Conference, a movement topractice educational democratization as an organization, not individually
emerged, within which teachers

recognized the limitations of scholarly

theories and pedagogy from abroad and felt the need for a theoretical basis
enabling the analysis of reality （Otsuki Takeshi, Kankoku kyoiku jijo（Theeducational situation in South Korea）,Shin-Nihon Shinsho, 1992, pp. 118-120）.
26

Korean Teachers and Educational Workers Union, Commemoration of theAnniversary of the KTU, South Korea Educational Movement White Paper: 1978-1990,
documents edition, 1990, pp. 173-175.

27

KFTA, 70 Years of KFTA History, 1947-2017, 2017, p. 295.

28

Ibid., pp. 276-277.

29

KFTA, The National Assembly must promptly enact the Teachers Status
Act, May 1989.

30

The Teachers Status Act makes explicit teachers（1）freedom of educational
and political activity,（2）school safety management deduction system,（3）guarantee of status,（4）prohibition of overnight duties,（5）system foroverseas study sabbaticals, （6）economical preference, （7）rights to
association and collective bargaining dependent on the Act,（8）arbitrationand mediation system, etc.

162 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea
31

KFTA,

Improvement of teachers status and national development,inMaterials from the National Teachers Representation Conference Toward Enacting the
Teachers Status Act, 1990, p. 52.
32

Ibid., p. 16.

33

March 9, 1989, 13th National Assembly, 145th Session, 9th Assembly Meeting,Labor Committee, pp. 14-16.

34

In South Korea, the 1981 revisions of the State Public Oﬃcials Act and Local
Public Officials Act categorized public officials as those in general and inspecial service, applying a grade system from 1 to 9 to the former. Thissystem was not applied to the latter category, which has its own rank andremuneration structure and includes educational public officials, military,
ﬁreﬁghters, and diplomats.

35

In South Korea, from the 1948 establishment of the government on, theMinistry of Education s name has changed four times（Ministry of Education（ Munkyo-bu ）, Ministry of Education（ Kyoyuk-bu ）, Ministry of Educational
Resources（ Kyoyuk-injeok jawon-bu ）, Ministry of Education, Science andTechnology（Kyoyuk kwahak kisul-bu）,（current）Ministry of Education（Kyoyukbu）. This paper uses

Ministry of Education （in its Kyoyuk-bu form）forconvenience throughout.
36

May 15, 1989, 13th National Assembly, 146th Session, 4th Assembly Meeting,pp. 45-46.

37

Ibid., p. 45.

38

October 18, 1989,

13 th National Assembly, 147 th Session, 10 th Assembly

Meeting, p.39.
39

When the KTU was ﬁrst formed, the Ministry of Education deﬁned teachers
as those who must take the lead for all others in obeying the law （emphasis
added）, stating that if teachers force through the formation of a teachers
union unrecognized by the law, they will seriously damage the image of the
instructor for the people of this country and negatively affect the social
awareness and climate of respect for teachers … （KTU, op. cit., 1990, pp. 397398）,emphasizing obedient compliance to the law.

40

March 9, 1989, 13th National Assembly, 145th Session, 9th Assembly Meeting,Labor Committee, p.16.

41

Ibid., p. 17.

日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 163

42

KTU, op. cit., 1990, pp. 750-752.

43

KFTA, op. cit., 2017, p. 306.

44

KFTA, op. cit., 1990, pp. 51-52.

45

Ibid., p. 50.

46

KFTA, op. cit., 2017, p.307.

47

May 8, 1991, 13th National Assembly, 154th Session, 11th Assembly Meeting,
Education and Physical Education Committee, p. 20.

48

Ibid., pp. 16-18.

49

KTU, History of the Korean Teachers and Educational Workers Union Movement 1,
Extralegal Union Edition, 2001, p. 780.

50
51

Ibid., p. 781.
thToward popular appeal in the teachers movement, KTU 12 Representative

Conference Materials, February 1994, pp. 63-64.
52
53

From interviews with KTU personnel.
Issues and Development Outlook for the KTU Second Term,

KTU 12 thRepresentative Conference Materials, February 1994, p. 39.
54

Song Gang-jik, Kankoku rodoho（South Korean Labor Law）
, Yuyusha, 2001, p.27.

55

KTU, op. cit., 2001, p. 740.

56

KTU 17 th Representative Conference Materials, December 1996, p. 37.

57

Those in favor of the Commission proposal were mainly members active in the
Seoul region, while the opposition was mainly composed of the executive
members, particularly the Central Executive Committee.

58

KTU 17 th Representative Conference Materials, op. cit.

59

KTU, op. cit., 2001, pp. 752-755.

60

KTU News Vol. 207, October 29, 1997, p. 1.

61

When the problem of legalization reappeared, the KFTA stated that a systemof negotiations and consultation, based on the Teachers Status Act, between
the teachers organization and the Minister of Education and education
governors is in place, but its legal eﬃcacy is weak, arguing for the enactmentof a special law distinct from the Teachers Status Act that would apply only
to teachers（ organizations）（KFTA, op. cit., November 1998, pp. 72-75）.

62

With regard to the enactment of the Teachers Union Act , the Ministry of
Education stated that we have reached the stage of having a legal systemaligned with international standards such as the ILO and the OECD ELSA

164 日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022）

The Enactment of the Educational Workers Labor Union Act in South Korea

report （November 18, 1998,

15 th National Assembly, 198 th Session,11 th

Assembly Meeting, p. 41）.
63

KTU, Proposal for Gaining Legal Organization Status with Two Labor Rights
Ensured, January 1998, p. 3.

64

In this regard, internal opinions included that the legal basis for a teachersorganization which is not a labor union but can negotiate with the Ministry of
Education is basically the Teachers Status Act, showing that the KTU wasconstantly conscious of the KFTA（KTU, ibid., p. 3）.

65

The chair of the KTU s Solidarity Committee of the time held that as a labor
union is an autonomous organization acting upon its own terms, … teachers
unions and teachers organizations cannot be regulated by the same law（KFTA, op. cit., November 1998, p. 80）.
66

Kim Kyeong-yun（KFTA Educational Administration Section head）, A
realistic proposal ensuring the special qualities and working rights ofeducation, KFTA, ibid., pp. 72-73.

日本教育行政学会年報 No. 48（2022） 165