Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

Republic of Korea

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) (Ratification: 1992)
Labour Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150) (Ratification: 1997)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour inspection and labour administration, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 150 (labour administration) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU) and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) on Convention No. 81, received in 2024, and the Government’s responses thereto. It also notes the observations of the FKTU on Convention No. 150, received in 2024, and the Government’s response thereto.

Labour inspection

Article 3 of Convention No. 81. Primary functions of labour inspectors. Dispute resolution. Following its previous comments regarding the role of labour inspectors in labour dispute settlement, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, on average, 55.6 per cent of reported cases are closed by agreement between the parties, and that, in 2023, labour inspectors spent, on average, 37.1 days on dispute settlement, which represented a 26.9 per cent decrease compared to 2018. The Committee also notes the statistics provided by the Government regarding the number of complaints that resulted in prosecutions, as well as the Government’s indication that it cannot disclose the specific types of sanctions imposed. The Committeerequests the Government to continue to indicate the time and resources spent by the labour inspectorate on dispute settlement, compared to their primary duties.

Articles 5(a) and 7. Effective cooperation and adequate training. Following its previous request on the coherence between internal administrative interpretations and Supreme court precedents, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Employment and Labour (MOEL) has implemented a training recommendation system tailored to each inspector, which includes training on judicial interpretation. The Government also indicates that the MOEL modifies its administrative interpretation according to the intention of decisions made by the Supreme Court, to avoid confusions in the field. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Articles 5(a) and 17. Cooperation with other government services the justice system. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s statistics for 2023, indicating 67,185 administrative corrections and 69 judicial actions initiated for 22,151 workplaces subject to regular inspections, while 31,695 administrative corrections and 514 judicial actions were initiated for 5,969 workplaces subject to special inspections. The Government further indicates that, excluding occupational safety and health (OSH), 43,848 cases have been handled in 2023 through judicial action, compared to 51,875 in 2021. The KCTU nevertheless indicates in its observations that less than 1 per cent of the total number of inspected workplaces covers OSH each year, and that even less cases are referred to courts. In response, the Government indicates that since it introduced “risk assessment specialized inspections” in 2023, which prioritize corrective actions, the number of administrative fines and judicial cases decreased. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how the labour inspectorate receive information on the outcomes of cases referred for judicial action, and the regularity of this information-sharing. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it is left to the discretion of labour inspectors to give warning and advice instead of instituting or recommending proceedings, in accordance with Article 17(2).

Article 5(b). Collaboration of the labour inspection with employers and workers and their organizations. Regarding the collaboration between the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations, including when investigating accidents, the Committee notes that the Government refers to section 14 of the Work Guidelines for Labour Inspectors, providing that workplace inspections should involve the participation of workers. According to the KCTU’s observations, however, changes to existing procedures have restricted the participation of trade unions, and in practice, workers’ representatives and honorary industrial safety inspectors are rarely notified of inspections. In addition, according to the KCTU, since 2022, the MOEL has refused to disclose the list of workplaces where serious accidents have occurred. The Committee notes that in its response, the Government indicates that: (i) workplaces with serious industrial accidents are publicly announced once a year, pursuant to the OSH Act, and twice a year pursuant to the Serious Accidents Punishments Act, but disclosure of investigation results into accident causes are currently legally restricted; and (ii) it may not be always appropriate for unions to directly participate in these investigations, so the decision is left to the investigative authorities. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to promote collaboration between the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations, including when investigating accidents.

Articles 6 and 15(a) and (c). Independence, professional integrity of labour inspectors, and their duty of confidentiality. Following its previous comments on this matter, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding awareness-raising materials created regarding the Code of Conduct and the training conducted. The Government also refers to the Operation Guidelines on the Prevention of Conflict of Interest for Public Servants at the MOEL, implemented as of May 2022, to prevent conflicts of interest that may arise for public servants in the performance of their duties. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that there were five cases of violation of the Code of Conduct by labour inspectors during the reporting period, resulting in two pay cuts, two suspensions, and one demotion. The Committee further notes the observations of the FKTU, according to which some labour inspectors negligently refer cases of workplace harassment back to the workplace, or pressure victims of wage arrears to withdraw their complaints. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information onthe application of: (i) the Operation Guidelines on the Prevention of Conflict of Interest for Public Servants at the MOEL, as concerns labour inspectors; and (ii) the Code of Conduct.

Article 16. Adequate frequency and thoroughness of inspections to secure compliance. Follow-up visits. The Committee notes the Government’s response to its previous comments on this matter, that additional follow-up visits are conducted when verification cannot be done through documents in the corrective action reports submitted by the employer. In addition, the Government indicates that around 2,000 workplaces were subject to more than two follow-up inspections out of 15,000 workplaces who submitted corrective action reports. The KCTU, in their observations, refers to a new direction for OSH inspections, including on-site verification checks and re-inspections, announced by the Government in 2022, which received strong support from the union. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in the procedures and the criteria to determine whether to conduct follow-up visits. It requests the Government to continue to indicate the number of follow-up visits conducted in response to an unsatisfactory corrective action report, particularly in the area of OSH.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication to the ILO of an annual report. Following its previous comments on this matter, the Committee welcomes that the extracts of the annual Employment and Labour White Paper provided by the Government, contain all the information required by Article 21 of the Convention, including on the number of workplaces liable to labour inspection (Article 21(c)). The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Labour administration

Article 7 of Convention No. 150. Extension of the functions of the labour administration to workers who are not employees. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that non-regular workers such as part-time and dispatched workers, are already covered by the labour administration system. The Government indicates that it is expanding policy areas to cover self-employed individuals and labour providers, including through the extension of employment insurance and industrial accident insurance coverage. The Committee notes the observation by FKTU that gaps in coverage and other issues remain, including the misclassification of platform workers, among others. In response, the Government refers to a range of measures and initiatives undertaken, including the elaboration of a Common Standard Contract for labour providers, such as platform workers, to promote fair contractual practices and addressing discriminatory treatment against non-regular workers through inspections. With reference to paragraph 167 of its 2024 General Survey, Labour administration in a changing world of work, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to protect workers who are not, in law, employed persons, such as platform workers and self-employed workers.