This Article attempts to examine the labor´s voice in shaping of the Employment Insurance Act of Korea (EIA), through analyzing its legislative history, and by reference of the experience of U. S. A. in the enactment of a counterpart legislation, the Social Security Act (1935). It further aims at tracing out the dominant reasons why the labor´s voice had been diminished in making of the EIA.
Despite fundamental differences in civic culture of both countries, the author argues, final outcome could be regraded as similar in that liberal or radical labor´s claims which had greatly influenced in the initial shaping of EIA was eventually put down by government´s political initiative in final enactment. The author underscores that main reasons for labor´s frustration were basically attributable to their own inability to organize labor party and labor-oppressive social structure in both countries.
However, he emphasizes that the causes of labor´s failure in both countries were distinguishable in light of political background and elite´s leadership.
In U. S. A., President Roosevelt and his progressive network of political elite had made wise decision of withdrawing the government´s bill to prevent radical social movement of rank and file. Contrary to this, in Korea, government´s bill had been passed under those complex circumstances of conservative political leadership in labor-oppressive policy and government-initiative tradition in the legislative process.
Lastly, he concludes that it should not be underestimated that labor´s voice substantially influenced in formation stage, regardless of the final turnout of the legislation, where evidence of labor´s radical voice could hardly be identified.
|