□ A judgment has been made that it is inappropriate to disallow the change of workplace due to the overdue period of application for the change, even though a farm owner terminated a labor contract without agreement with foreign workers.

The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC, Chairperson Kim Hong-Il) expressed its opinion to the head of the 〇〇 Regional Employment and Labor Administration that in cases where business owners unfairly terminated labor contracts with foreign workers who entered Korea through the Employment Permit System, these workers should be allowed to change the workplace to enable them to continue their job search during their stay in Korea.
 

While the Employment Permit System disallows changing the workplace in principle, the application for change of workplace is allowed up to three times within one month of the termination of a labor contract with the business owner.

□ Worker A and Worker B who entered Korea through the Employment Permit System signed three-year labor contracts with a farm owner in December 2021 and April 2021, respectively.

However, the farm owner violated the Employment Permit System by illegally sending Worker A and Worker B to work at the farm of the owner’s brother.

Moreover, the farm owner falsely reported to the 〇〇 Regional Employment and Labor Administration that the termination of the labor contract was “an early termination based on autonomous agreement” even though there was no attributable reasons for the termination.

Worker A and Worker B discovered the termination of their labor contracts two months later following the aforementioned report when they visited the 〇〇 Immigration Office to obtain a certificate of alien registration.

The 〇〇 Regional Employment and Labor Administration imposed a one-year employment restriction against the farm that illegally sent workers and a two-year employment restriction against the one that employed those workers.

Furthermore, the Administration disallowed Worker A and Worker B from changing their workplace as the period of application for change of workplace has expired, and they did not apply for it despite being aware that they were illegally sent to another farm.

With regard to the aforementioned disposition, Worker A and Worker B filed grievance complaints with ACRC in December 2022, stating that they are at the risk of deportation to their home country due to being classified as illegal immigrants as a consequence of actions by the farm owner.

□ ACRC expressed its opinion to the 〇〇 Regional Employment and Labor Administration, suggesting that it may consider allowing the change of workplace based on the comprehensive consideration of facts that ▴the farm owner faced employment restrictions due to illegally sending Worker A and Worker B to another farm, ▴Worker A and Worker B were unaware of the termination of their labor contracts, as it was done unilaterally by the farm owner without agreement, and ▴the delay in wage payment for Worker A and Worker B is among the reasons for changing the workplace.

〇〇 Regional Employment and Labor Administration actively accepted the opinion expressed by ACRC and allowed Worker A and Worker B to change their workplace so that they recover their qualification for stay and contribute to domestic business through their labor participation.

□ ACRC Vice Chairperson Kim Tae-Gyu said, “We will establish improvement measures through the fact-finding research of the Employment Permit System and take the lead to contribute to resolve manpower shortage issues in Korea by actively redressing grievances of foreign workers facing difficulties caused by social discrimination.”