![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
benihime99.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
omonatheydidBy Lee Tae-hoon
A father of a 27-year-old high school graduate has been fighting one of the country’s largest automobile manufacturers for the past six years over alleged employment discrimination experienced by his son and son’s coworkers because they performed their obligatory military service.
The Constitution stipulates that no citizen shall be treated unfavorably on account of the fulfillment of his obligation for military service, but apparently that is not the case for Kia Motors’ workers.
“My son left his job in 2004 to join the Army with high expectations of returning to Kia since its union and management had agreed to rehire those who had to perform their compulsory duty,” said Baek Jae-young.
“Except for those who took a leave of absence to serve in the military, all of his fellow workers who joined the company at the same time on a contract basis have become regular employees.”
Three other former workers and the junior Baek, who received manufacturing jobs at the auto company in 2003 after 10 months of internship, filed a lawsuit against Kia Motors for discrimination after they were not rehired following completion of their service.
However, the High Court ruled in favor of the company in 2009.
The senior Baek filed a petition with Cheong Wa Dae, the National Human Rights Commission, the Ministry of National Defense (MND) and the Ministry of Employment and Labor, but all refused to look into the case.
In the petition, he noted that his son had no choice but to go to a vocational high school as his family could not afford college tuition and that if the junior Baek had wanted, he could have been exempted from military duty due to a serious ear infection.
“I regret allowing him to undergo an operation to treat the illness and sending him to the military,” the petition read. “He should have deserved favorable treatment rather than discrimination for his service. I’m certain that if he dodged the draft, he would be working at the Gwangju plant of Kia Motors now.”
The junior Baek applied for a position once again in February this year, but the company turned down his application. Kia Motors denied allegations that it did not respect its agreement with the union that it would give priority to rehiring those who had to leave the company for military duty.
“We have nothing particular to say about the case since recruitment decisions were legitimately made in accordance with the hiring regulations of the company,” a KIA spokesman said.
Is deferral a cure-all?
The government recently revised the Enforcement Decree of the Military Service to allow all male high school graduates to defer their duty until the age of 24 in hopes of allowing someone like Baek to work for about four years before joining the armed forces.
Experts, however, point out that most male high school graduates will continue to face job discrimination as most of the large corporations do not even bother to receive applications from those subject to military duty.
According to the Military Manpower Administration, of some 150,000 vocational high school graduates in 2010 and 2011 who were allowed to postpone their duty until 24, only 91 opted to enjoy the benefit.
Park Sang-hyun, a researcher at the Korea Information Employment Service, said that the majority of male high school graduates will go on to end up in low pay, temporary jobs at a small company unless stronger and more practical measures are taken.
“The majority of male high school graduates end up in small- and medium-sized companies that often violate the law mandating the rehiring of regular workers after military service,” he said.
Lack of equal opportunities
A survey of 5,281 vocational high school graduates that Park carried out in 2011 reveals that the employment rate for male respondents was only 70.2 percent, compared to 82 percent for female respondents. It also clearly showed that male graduates work more but receive less wages and that they encounter great difficulties in landing a job in large corporations.
According to the poll, their chance to enter a company with 300 or more employees was 15.6 percent, whereas that of female respondents stood at 44.5 percent.
On average, male respondents worked 52.7 hours per week, 42 minutes more than the maximum permissible legal limit, while receiving only 1.238 million won per month ($1,103), which is less than half of what college graduates earn. Female graduates worked 48.8 hours per week, but received a thicker paycheck of 1.391 million won on average.
“The most critical factor that makes male high school graduates lag far behind females is the obligation for military service,” Park said.
Lim Tae-hoon, head of the Center for Military Rights in Korea, urged civic groups to boycott products manufactured from companies, including KIA Motors, which practice unfair discrimination against men who perform their military service.
Rep. Seo Jong-pyo of the main opposition Democratic United Party, said his party will consider revising the law to make the MND reject the procurement of goods from defense manufacturers found to have discriminated against servicemen.
Okay, it's not very often that we'd read such an article about men suffering job discrimination and I guess some might go "oh those poor men" in a ironical way. But this situation does look unfair to me.
Source: Koreatimes
A father of a 27-year-old high school graduate has been fighting one of the country’s largest automobile manufacturers for the past six years over alleged employment discrimination experienced by his son and son’s coworkers because they performed their obligatory military service.
The Constitution stipulates that no citizen shall be treated unfavorably on account of the fulfillment of his obligation for military service, but apparently that is not the case for Kia Motors’ workers.
“My son left his job in 2004 to join the Army with high expectations of returning to Kia since its union and management had agreed to rehire those who had to perform their compulsory duty,” said Baek Jae-young.
“Except for those who took a leave of absence to serve in the military, all of his fellow workers who joined the company at the same time on a contract basis have become regular employees.”
Three other former workers and the junior Baek, who received manufacturing jobs at the auto company in 2003 after 10 months of internship, filed a lawsuit against Kia Motors for discrimination after they were not rehired following completion of their service.
However, the High Court ruled in favor of the company in 2009.
The senior Baek filed a petition with Cheong Wa Dae, the National Human Rights Commission, the Ministry of National Defense (MND) and the Ministry of Employment and Labor, but all refused to look into the case.
In the petition, he noted that his son had no choice but to go to a vocational high school as his family could not afford college tuition and that if the junior Baek had wanted, he could have been exempted from military duty due to a serious ear infection.
“I regret allowing him to undergo an operation to treat the illness and sending him to the military,” the petition read. “He should have deserved favorable treatment rather than discrimination for his service. I’m certain that if he dodged the draft, he would be working at the Gwangju plant of Kia Motors now.”
The junior Baek applied for a position once again in February this year, but the company turned down his application. Kia Motors denied allegations that it did not respect its agreement with the union that it would give priority to rehiring those who had to leave the company for military duty.
“We have nothing particular to say about the case since recruitment decisions were legitimately made in accordance with the hiring regulations of the company,” a KIA spokesman said.
Is deferral a cure-all?
The government recently revised the Enforcement Decree of the Military Service to allow all male high school graduates to defer their duty until the age of 24 in hopes of allowing someone like Baek to work for about four years before joining the armed forces.
Experts, however, point out that most male high school graduates will continue to face job discrimination as most of the large corporations do not even bother to receive applications from those subject to military duty.
According to the Military Manpower Administration, of some 150,000 vocational high school graduates in 2010 and 2011 who were allowed to postpone their duty until 24, only 91 opted to enjoy the benefit.
Park Sang-hyun, a researcher at the Korea Information Employment Service, said that the majority of male high school graduates will go on to end up in low pay, temporary jobs at a small company unless stronger and more practical measures are taken.
“The majority of male high school graduates end up in small- and medium-sized companies that often violate the law mandating the rehiring of regular workers after military service,” he said.
Lack of equal opportunities
A survey of 5,281 vocational high school graduates that Park carried out in 2011 reveals that the employment rate for male respondents was only 70.2 percent, compared to 82 percent for female respondents. It also clearly showed that male graduates work more but receive less wages and that they encounter great difficulties in landing a job in large corporations.
According to the poll, their chance to enter a company with 300 or more employees was 15.6 percent, whereas that of female respondents stood at 44.5 percent.
On average, male respondents worked 52.7 hours per week, 42 minutes more than the maximum permissible legal limit, while receiving only 1.238 million won per month ($1,103), which is less than half of what college graduates earn. Female graduates worked 48.8 hours per week, but received a thicker paycheck of 1.391 million won on average.
“The most critical factor that makes male high school graduates lag far behind females is the obligation for military service,” Park said.
Lim Tae-hoon, head of the Center for Military Rights in Korea, urged civic groups to boycott products manufactured from companies, including KIA Motors, which practice unfair discrimination against men who perform their military service.
Rep. Seo Jong-pyo of the main opposition Democratic United Party, said his party will consider revising the law to make the MND reject the procurement of goods from defense manufacturers found to have discriminated against servicemen.
Okay, it's not very often that we'd read such an article about men suffering job discrimination and I guess some might go "oh those poor men" in a ironical way. But this situation does look unfair to me.
Source: Koreatimes
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 02:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:53 pm (UTC)but kia's move was pretty douche-y, especially since they've stated that they'll rehire.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:33 pm (UTC)either something corrupt/fishy is going on and someone in the high court is getting some kickbacks OR the really are throwing the Constitution out the window. if it is the latter, then they should reconsider the deferment of service or abolish the mandatory requirement all together.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:39 pm (UTC)From what I understand from the compagny declaration they didn't fulfill the job requirement anymore (even if that's a lie). In order for the court to rule in favor of the appelant they have to proove that the defendant did discriminate because of that particular reason. If they were not able to do so, the court has to rule in favor of teh defendant.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:45 pm (UTC)Still reeling over the fact that in at least one area, women actually make more than men. Never thought I'd see the day.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:49 pm (UTC)Oh logic, where art thou? >.>
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:59 pm (UTC)Wait. Really confused here. Its obligatory-you have no choice. Every man has to do it,am I right? So...
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:31 pm (UTC)1. if even a single parent resides in Korea (so if your entire family immigrates to the US, you are free. But if you alone gain foreign citizenship, if your parents still reside in Korea, as soon as you enter the country, you are obliged to stay for military duty).
2. if you are between the ages of... I think it's 18 through 36 now. (if you're over a certain age (28? I think) they make you do military desk work).
no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 07:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 08:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:33 pm (UTC)Instead of offering up some shitty 2 year temp job.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:02 pm (UTC)That is so crazy, I thought pretty much universally men received more wages for the same job over women.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 07:04 pm (UTC)That discrimination is not based on their gender but on the fact that they go to the army.
If women were to fulfill their military duty they would probably suffer that particular discrimination too.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 07:53 pm (UTC)According to the poll, their chance to enter a company with 300 or more employees was 15.6 percent, whereas that of female respondents stood at 44.5 percent.
I think they're misinterpreting this. I'm not sure how to explain these results, but I know that women have it worse.
Because
a) men are often promoted over women http://thegrandnarrative.com/2010/01/18/korea-sexual-discrimination-workplace/ (http://thegrandnarrative.com/2010/01/18/korea-sexual-discrimination-workplace/)
b) women get fired and/or are expected to resign at marriage or their first pregnancy http://thegrandnarrative.com/2009/02/05/for-every-birth-a-korean-career-dies/ (http://thegrandnarrative.com/2009/02/05/for-every-birth-a-korean-career-dies/)
and c) men are hired over women when they have the same credentials http://thegrandnarrative.com/2011/11/14/korea-sexual-discrimination-jobs-hiring/ (http://thegrandnarrative.com/2011/11/14/korea-sexual-discrimination-jobs-hiring/)
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 09:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 02:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 02:21 am (UTC)Women have also faced discrimination, and do so far more regularly than men.
Citing a survey of high school graduates from vocational (i.e. trade) schools is not representative of the entire working populace of South Korea.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 07:07 am (UTC)Those men are not discriminated upon because they are men but because they fulfill their military duty. If women where to do so they'd face discrimination too.
I think the author worded his article wrong. He shouldn't use male/female stats but veterant/non-veterant stat. In that case it is so that women are a big part of the non-veterant group.
But sexism in the working industry is another issue (maybe closely related).
no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 01:56 am (UTC)I also like this article, because it's an example of how men face discrimination sometimes too. This particular situation is in S. Korea, but it just shows that men aren't ALWAYS the privileged ones. If it can happen in S. Korea, it can happen in other parts of the world too, the US, Europe, etc.