Will a ruling come from the Labor-Management Conciliation Committee on the user rights of Hyundai Motor's 'Car Master'?

The upcoming user recognition judgment for Hyundai's subcontracted workers, known as "Kamaster," could determine the extent of their rights under the Yellow Packet Law. This critical decision by the Central Labor Union (CLU) on November 31st will examine whether Hyundai should be considered a worker in various job categories such as production, meals, security, and sales.

The CLU is expected to issue a ruling based on the fact announcement procedure initiated on October 30th following a public consultation period that lasted from October 21st to November 21st. The key issue at stake is the classification of "Kamaster," specialized contract workers employed by Hyundai's sales outlets, as users or workers.

While the Ulsan CLU recognized user status for workers in catering, security, and security sectors during previous rulings, it did not grant the same recognition to Kamaster. The automaker argues that the sales outlets operate as independent entities with separate business spaces and organizations under separate contracts with Hyundai, and thus, the Kamaster should not be classified as employees.

The sales association, however, contends that the Kamaster should be included in the mandatory labor negotiations as they have a direct impact on the pricing and system of car sales. The scope of compulsory negotiations was initially limited to providing dining, restrooms, and security services, but the 9 trade unions requesting user status classification for Kamaster have excluded these aspects from their demands.

The Ulsan CLU ruled that the subcontracting relationship between the government agency and the Kamaster falls under a "procurement contract," allowing the trade union to negotiate for wage and labor rights changes through a formal amendment process. Metal Workers Union, on the other hand, argued that recognizing user status in this case would render the Yellow Packet Law unnecessary and criticized the CLU's decision for ignoring the clear employer-employee relationship between Hyundai and the subcontracting workers.