▲ Kwon Young-guk, co-representative of the Coupang Countermeasures Committee, is speaking at a resolution meeting held in front of the Seoul Regional Labor Office on the 5th to condemn the collective layoffs of Coupang CLS and threats to its right to survival. ⓒ Reporter Kim Joo-heon
The Coupang Countermeasures Committee announced on the 15th that it would proceed with a group complaint and claim for damages in response to the controversy over Coupang’s ‘blacklist’, along with a request for special labor supervision from the Ministry of Employment and Labor.
After MBC reported on the 13th that Coupang operated a blacklist targeting workers and excluded them from employment or prevented them from working for a certain period of time, the Coupang Countermeasures Committee launched a committee to properly understand the reality of the blacklist and its problems. It was decided to request a special labor inspection.
The Coupang Countermeasures Committee said that from September 2017 to October last year, 16,450 people were included in the blacklist, and the number of people on the list continues to increase, with many key labor union executives, victims of COVID-19 group infections, and those who retired from work being blacklisted. It was confirmed that it was included in the list.
In addition, considering that there are about 50 reasons for exclusion for a certain period of time or permanently, including inability to perform normal work, failure to follow work instructions, repeated disciplinary action, disciplinary dismissal, neglect of work, and leaving the workplace without permission, it is clear that Coupang’s blacklist creation and management is organized and systematic. It was claimed that it had been done.
An official from the Coupang Countermeasures Committee said, “Coupang’s blacklist creation, operation, and management is an act of reigning over the Constitution and the law.” He added, “It violates the basic constitutional rights of freedom of occupation and labor rights, and exclusion from employment on the grounds of union activities is an act of dominion over the Constitution and the law.” “It can be seen as a violation of the three labor rights in itself,” he said.
Regarding the suspicion that Coupang created a blacklist of 16,450 people for the purpose of restricting employment, the problematic point is whether it violates the Labor Standards Act.
Creating a blacklist and excluding them from employment based on it constitutes an act of employment interference (Article 40 of the Labor Standards Act), and an unfair labor practice that disadvantages them for joining or participating in union activities (Article 81, Article 1 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act). corresponds to ).
In addition, using and managing personal information provided for employment beyond the purpose of collection constitutes a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act (Article 18, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Personal Information Protection Act).
Similar to the suspicions previously raised against Coupang, Market Curly was investigated by the Ministry of Labor and the Prosecutor’s Office, but the Ministry of Labor’s opinion was indictment, while the Prosecutor’s Office was in favor of acquittal.
At the time, Market Curly was accused of creating and operating a blacklist in a way that did not provide work to workers by preparing documents containing daily workers’ personal information (name, resident registration number, contact information, etc.) and delivering them to partner companies (recruitment agencies). was reported in March 2021 for violating the Standards Act, and Market Curly admitted the existence of the list at the time.
An official from the Coupang Countermeasures Committee said, “There are many precedents for holding those who created and managed the blacklist accountable through investigation and trial, but there is no precedent for systematically using it for the purpose of hindering the employment of large numbers of people over a long period of time like Coupang.” “The investigative authorities must thoroughly investigate Coupang’s unconstitutional and social behavior and hold it accountable,” he said.
▲ An official of Coupang Fulfillment Service (CFS) is filing a complaint against Coupang Countermeasures Committee representative and lawyer Kwon Young-guk and three others for spreading false information and defamation at Songpa Police Station in Seoul. ⓒ Coupang CFS
In response, an official of Coupang Fulfillment Service (CFS) filed a complaint against Coupang Countermeasures Committee representative and lawyer Kwon Young-guk and three others for spreading false information and defamation at the Songpa Police Station in Seoul on the 15th.
A Coupang CFS official refuted, “Even though expressions such as Daegu Center do not exist in CFS personnel evaluation materials, lawyer Kwon and others falsely claimed that CFS created a blacklist using secret codes by referring to the code name Daegu Center.” .
He continued, “Attorney Kwon even arbitrarily added a union title item that was not in the CFS personnel evaluation data. He showed the fabricated data to reporters and interfered with employment due to union activities, as if the company was operating an organized comment unit to sway public opinion.” “They made false claims that it was fabricated,” he said.
