본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

A Corporate Ethical Considerations on Labor - Management Dispute Reconciliation Using Habermas’ Discussion Ethics Model -

  • Legal Theory & Practice Review
  • Abbr : LTPR
  • 2024, 12(4), pp.467-496
  • Publisher : The Korea Society for Legal Theory and Practice Inc.
  • Research Area : Social Science > Law
  • Received : October 30, 2024
  • Accepted : November 27, 2024
  • Published : November 30, 2024

Koo, Kang-Hoe 1

1두잉 그룹지원실

Accredited

ABSTRACT

Currently, in resolving labor-management disputes, a third-party labor committee composed of worker representatives, scholars, legal practitioners, and representatives of companies or organizations is established to hold public debates related to the resolution of the dispute. The importance of doing this is being pointed out. In many labor-management dispute resolution procedures, public involvement is implemented, but public discussion plays an important role in attempting to resolve disputes. However, in public debate that develops through dialogue and communication in the real world, it is extremely difficult to realize public discourse through ideal dialogue and communication as Habermas did. In reality, there are many cases where coordinated discussions do not take place among discussants or where specific participants arbitrarily lead discussions. In addition, discussion participants with different values ​​or interests may not reach agreement on dispute resolution, which may lead to deadlock in discussions and block decision-making related to reconciliation and mediation. In order to find the basis for legitimacy related to decision-making on labor-management compromise within the realistic practice of open discussion, it is inevitable to answer the normative question: What is a desirable open discussion? In the field of labor law, a number of empirical and empirical studies relevant to public discussion have been accumulated. However, in conventional research, normative theories regarding ‘the fundamental attitude of desirable discussions’ are not sufficiently discussed. However, in a situation where such normative theory does not exist, it is difficult to find standards to evaluate their agreement for realistic public discussion and to improve the current situation for better discussion. In ensuring the legitimacy of decision-making through the implementation of public discussion, it is an important task to identify the normative requirements that the discussion process must meet. Based on this awareness of the problem, this study organizes the meaning and tasks of public discussion related to labor-management disputes based on knowledge from discussion theory, including Habermas, and establishes the basic principles and normative requirements that public discussion must meet, we consider the basic ideas of evaluating the desirability of discussion. At this time, I introduces the concept of a discussion system and examines a theoretical framework to ensure the legitimacy of decision-making to resolve disputes across various discussions. In addition, the discussion ethics that this study is based on is an attempt to change the procedure to establish the basis for the possibility of universalizing moral judgments or norms in the form of Kant’s categorical imperative by moving it from the perspective of mutual subjects to the scene of practical discussion. This article excludes debates about the rights and wrongs of this normative approach. Rather, we argue that achieving reconciliation should be justified and actively defended from the perspective of the formation of new norms.

Statistics

  • 11 Viewed
  • 0 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Basic Search Advanced Search