[Editorial] Semiconductor Labor Exceptions: Don't Hide Behind Social Dialogue

Employment and Labor Minister Kim Young-hoon briefs reporters on a proposal for social dialogue on the Mega Special Zone Special Act, covering labor deregulation measures such as exemptions from the 52-hour workweek for research staff in mega special zones and an expansion of the types of work eligible for dispatch labor, at the Government Complex Seoul in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on the 15th of last month. The Trans-Regional Special Zone Act is the renamed version of the Mega Special Zone Special Act.

The Democratic Party of Korea has decided to submit two versions of the Trans-Regional Special Zone Act, which is intended to support national strategic industries such as semiconductors: one that includes labor exemptions and one that does not. It will then review the two bills together. This is an irresponsible move that delays a decision while trying to gauge both sides of the debate.

Semiconductors are a key industry underpinning our exports and economic growth. Major countries, including the United States and China, are also locked in fierce competition over technology. At worksites where workloads intensify according to research and development (R&D) and production schedules, the speed of response determines competitiveness. We need to consider whether it is best to apply standard working-hour rules in exactly the same way to these worksites.

This is not an argument against the purpose of the 52-hour workweek. Rather, it is a call to allow necessary exceptions that take into account the characteristics of specific industries and jobs. For strategic industries directly tied to the national economy and security, it would be desirable to allow working hours to be managed flexibly for limited fields and workers. After all, isn't the purpose of special economic zones to boost competitiveness by allowing exceptions to existing rules?

That does not mean labor exemptions should become a gateway to unlimited long working hours. The scope of eligible workers and the duration of the exemptions must be strictly defined, and safeguards must be institutionalized to ensure workers' consent, adequate compensation and rest, and protection of their health. Extending the period for employing fixed-term workers, which could affect job security, is a separate matter that must be considered cautiously. The solution is to allow limited flexibility where it is needed and put safeguards in place to prevent adverse effects.

The government and ruling party should not put forward bills for and against the exemptions side by side and test the waters. Instead, they should present a concrete proposal specifying the scope and conditions of the exemptions. They should use it as a basis to persuade labor groups and engage in thorough discussions, but they must not use social dialogue to justify delaying legislation. Even if no agreement is ultimately reached, the government and ruling party must make a decision and take responsibility for it.

Competition in advanced industries will not wait for our domestic debate to end. It makes no sense to pledge to foster national strategic industries while hesitating to make the rules more flexible. We must establish realistic exemptions that protect workers while safeguarding industrial competitiveness. The government and ruling party must make the decision now.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.