logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.11.04 2014가단19693
임금 등
Text

1. The defendant shall attach a separate sheet to the plaintiff (appointed party) and each of the designated parties listed in the separate sheet.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the respective entries in Gap evidence of Nos. 1 to 27, 32, and 33 (including paper numbers) and the whole purport of the pleadings:

The relevant defendant is a company running passenger transportation business, etc. at the Jeonju City, and the plaintiff (appointed parties) and the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiffs, etc.") are drivers employed by and providing labor to the defendant, who have joined the National Public Transport and Social Services Workers' Union (former National Transport and Social Workers' Union; hereinafter referred to as the "Korean Workers' Union") affiliated with the National Federation of Public Transport and Social Services (hereinafter referred to as the "National Workers' Union") belonging to the National Federation of Public Transport and Social Workers' Unions.

(b) Collective bargaining and industrial action from around 2010; 1) Jeollabuk-do is an industrial union consisting of workers engaged in the land transportation or any incidental business related thereto from before the union of this case, which belongs to the Korean Federation of Motor Vehicle Workers' Unions (hereinafter referred to as "former Motor Vehicle Workers' Unions") under the Korean Federation of Motor Vehicle Workers' Unions.

(2) A bus companies in the former North Korea including the Defendant (hereinafter collectively referred to as “buser companies”) concluded a collective agreement with the former North Korean Automobile Labor Union around June 2010 and workers employed by the Defendant were subscribed to the former North Korean Automobile Labor Union.

3. Since bus companies entered into a collective agreement as above, some of workers belonging to the Defendant entered into the instant union, and the instant union continuously requested collective bargaining since around that time to enter into a collective agreement with bus companies. However, bus companies already requested to engage in collective bargaining with bus companies, but the instant union union at the time.

arrow