The new ‘GIST Main Gate,’ a landmark embodying the identification and symbolism of Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST). Courtesy of GIST.
A battle between the labor unions and the administration on the Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST) over their collective bargaining course of has escalated, elevating the opportunity of industrial action by the unions.
On March 31, the GIST chapters of the National Science and Technology Labor Union, the National Public Research Labor Union (underneath the KCTU), and the GIST Researcher’s Union (for full-time researchers) introduced in an announcement {that a} vote for industrial action held the day past was permitted. Of the 144 members, 136 (94.4%) participated, with 126 (92.6%) voting in favor.
GIST and the unions have been negotiating a collective agreement, efficient from 2024, for over two years. In their assertion, the unions declared, “The three major GIST unions announce the commencement of our first-ever joint industrial action to counter management’s attempts to neutralize the collective agreement.”
The unions cited the rationale for the vote, stating, “Of the 157 proposed clauses, management has suggested downward revisions for 64 and the deletion of 60. They are trying to roll back existing labor conditions and the basic rights of the labor union.”
They additional criticized the GIST administration, saying it “is trying to delete the ‘equal pay for equal value of labor’ principle and even reduce essential welfare benefits like childcare support.” They added, “The attitude of trying to limit even the minimal foundation for cooperation, such as access to budget and settlement data aimed at ensuring institutional transparency, is highly inappropriate.”
The unions urged administration to cease its one-sided bargaining method that weakens their rights. “They are attempting to limit the scope of the agreement to union members only, reduce the clause on agreement for personnel matters of union officials to ‘hearing opinions,’ and are even pushing to introduce performance evaluations for full-time union officials,” the unions stated.
In a clarifying assertion launched on April 1, GIST countered, “In the process of reviewing the collective agreement draft proposed by the unions, we responded with a ‘deletion opinion’ for 60 clauses that were difficult to accept. This means that revisions and adjustments are necessary in light of current laws, government guidelines, and cases at other institutions.”
“While the number may seem large, most of these are significant issues that could impede the rational operation of the institution if accepted as the unions demand,” GIST said.
Specifically, GIST defined that the unions’ calls for embrace contents that would undermine the equity and autonomy of the establishment’s operations. These embrace the institution of a welfare committee with necessary membership for all staff, to be operated with the union as its consultant; guaranteeing the very best efficiency analysis for full-time union officers; and requiring union agreement for the appointment of union executives or demanding prior session or consent on general personnel programs, together with hiring.
GIST stated, “It is difficult to find similar cases at other institutions, and a review is needed to determine their compliance with relevant laws and guidelines.” It added, “We have been negotiating continuously since the 2024 collective bargaining began, but we express regret that the unions unilaterally suspended the talks early this year and hope they will promptly return to the negotiating table.”
Copyright ⓒ DongA Science. All rights reserved.