<Anchor> The

22-year-old tripartite agreement, which began with the proposal of the KCTU to overcome the Corona19 crisis, was finally broken by the absence of the KCTU. This was due to a large difference in the internal view of the KCTU, and there was a conflict especially over the provision of the ban on dismissal.

Reporter Hee-won Je reports.

<Reporter> The

strongest objection to the tripartite agreement was the relatively weaker irregular workers.

There are no specific provisions in the agreement, such as prohibition of dismissal and countermeasures against the livelihood of the vulnerable.

On the contrary, he pointed out that there are many provisions to tolerate disadvantages, such as shortening working hours, actively working on leave, and swiftly approving reductions in leave allowances.

On the other hand, the key requirement,'dismissal' was expressed as a'effort level' without legal or institutional forcing.

There are also complaints that the government's target for expanding employment insurance is far less than the number of unemployed workers or special workers.

In this type of agreement, the weakest link, non-regular workers, is a claim that they will only share the pain, such as absences and wage cuts.

[Kim Sue-kuk/Non-regular Workers' Joint Struggle: The majority of non-regular workers outside the union are being fired countless times, and there is no action or promise for such dismissal in this agreement.]

However, the KCTU first proposed a one-point tripartite dialogue. Even if the leadership was somewhat abstract, it had to emphasize the meaning of the agreement itself.

[Kim Myung-hwan/Democratic Union Chairperson: I hope you don't use the expression Yahab. If you need to confirm the details of the (labor-management agreement) process, I will prepare it and release it at any time by the KCTU.]

There is also a time to interpret this ruin as a quarrel between the leader Kim Myung-hwan and Kang Kyung-pa, who is in the midst of the expiration of his term in December. .