Investigation into “Violence in Construction Industry” Led to the Death of a Worker, But the Companies Had Petitioned to “Drop Charges”

On May 7, a union member pays his respects at the Seoul National University Hospital funeral hall in Jongno-gu, Seoul, where a funeral parlor was prepared for the late Yang Hoe-dong, an executive of the Gangwon construction chapter of the Korean Construction Workers Union, who died after setting himself on fire ahead of his warrant review. Jo Tae-hyeong

Representatives of construction companies in the Gangwon region had written a letter asking the government to stop punishing the late Yang Hoe-dong, an executive of the Gangwon construction chapter of the Korean Construction Workers Union, an affiliate of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), who died after setting himself ablaze protesting against the investigation of union activities. The petition was written ahead of Yang’s warrant review. The investigative agency listed these companies as “victims” of blackmail and coercion from Yang, but the representatives actually said, “We were able to smoothly hire workers thanks to the union,” and “There was no blackmail or coercion.” This has triggered criticism that the government pushed ahead with an excessive investigation lacking an understanding of construction sites.

According to the coverage by the Kyunghyang Shinmun on May 9, fifteen representatives of construction firms in the Gangwon region submitted a letter requesting charges be dropped against Yang and two other executives of the Gangwon construction chapter of the Korean Construction Workers Union, indicted for collaborating in extortion, to the court in late April ahead of their warrant review. In the petition they mentioned that they had never been blackmailed or coerced by the union executives. However, the investigative agency stated these companies as the victims of extortion and blackmail.

According to the letter that the Kyunghyang Shinmun obtained, one head of a construction site wrote, “I think hiring workers through the union is the same as hiring a team or class of workers instead of hiring each and every worker individually.” He further wrote, “The negotiations went well without much friction, and we were able to proceed with the construction smoothly. The demonstration by the union did not interfere with our work.” He also mentioned the wages for full-time union executives and said, “We paid the wages without any problems since the full-time executives acted as a bridge, managing the tasks of the union members.” He added, “We paid according to the practices on site and of the central wage negotiation council, and from what I know, it is legally permitted.”

A director of one construction company also wrote, “The team leader of the KCTU and the full-time union executive made a huge contribution in supplying the company with workers, and they helped things run smoothly on site.” He wrote, “There wasn’t a single illegal act, such as coercion in recruiting workers or demand for the wages of full-time unionists.” The manager of another construction site wrote, “Since hiring local workers helps in many ways to reduce expenses, we hired verified local workers (through negotiations with the union) rather than go through the hassle of individually hiring all the workers.” He continued and wrote, “We do not want the executives arrested or criminally punished and cause confusion in the construction site.”

The representatives of the construction companies that wrote the letter said there was no blackmail or coercion by the labor unions. One construction site director said, “Construction proceeded smoothly without any demonstration or threats in the process of signing the contract and employing workers.” Another director said, “Although there was some friction in the negotiations and in assigning the workers, construction is currently in progress smoothly with cooperation from labor and management,” and added, “There was no explicit coercion to pay wages for full-time union executives.”

Labor criticized the government for pressuring workers with an unreasonable investigation without fully understanding the special nature of labor-management relations in construction sites. They argued that the construction union’s demand to employ union members and to pay the wages of full-time union executives were natural due to the characteristic of the industry, where there are many temporary workers and where the worksite does not remain for long. Kwon Du-seop, a lawyer for the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions said, “They labeled the bargaining process of making demands and pressing for those demands to be met as blackmail, making it illegal.” A police representative said, “We applied the criminal charges after identifying the facts based on statements.”