When Precarity Encounters COVID-19: A Critical Analysis of Korean Policy Responses

Abstract

In the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, Korea was considered a successful case of containment of infection. However, the employment protection response has not been as successful as the health response. Although the Korean Government has taken unprecedented fiscal measures, the hardest-hit groups including workers in non-standard employment are still the least protected. The pandemic has found countries with widespread precarious employment at their most vulnerable. Since the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the Government has promoted the deregulation of capital and the flexibilization of labour, with precarious work becoming ‘normal’. COVID-19 shows that workers excluded from labour protection before the crisis are the most vulnerable in the current crisis. Dependent contractors are not protected from termination of contract or loss of income, while employees in a comparable situation may be supported by job retention schemes and unemployment benefits. This means employers using dependent contractors can avoid employer liability in a normal situation as well as in times of crisis. While the Government attempts to expand unemployment insurance to certain groups of dependent contractors, debates over who should bear the financial burden are underway. Employers refuse to contribute to unemployment insurance for dependent contractors, arguing that they are not the employers of these workers. This article analyses how flexibilization in Korea has affected vulnerability and the segmentation of labour protection. It argues that the ‘protection gap’ among workers resulted from political choices and the strategy of capital to transfer cost-and-risks onto workers and society as a whole. These pre-pandemic political choices undermine the chances of a fair recovery. This article argues that establishing employer responsibility is essential for a human-centred recovery.

Note: Reprinted from International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 38, no. 4 (2022): 487–504, with permission of Kluwer Law International.

Keywords: COVID-19, Dependent Contractor, Income Support, Non-standard Employment, Unemployment Insurance, Employer’s Responsibility