The main opposition Democratic United Party is seeking to revise a set of labor laws in its bid to enhance the fundamental rights of workers. Yet the party’s move could undermine the current relative stability in industrial relations.

The party is focusing on workers’ rights as part of its campaign to “democratize the economy.” Economic democratization ― a new buzz word among domestic political parties ― involves two key aspects. One is to level the playing field between large and small companies while the other is to shore up the socio-economic status of workers.

The DUP has already submitted a raft of bills aimed at toughening regulations on big businesses, unnerving corporate executives who feel increasingly beleaguered.

To expand basic labor rights, the party has decided to revise such laws as the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, Labor Standards Act, Labor Relations Commission Act, Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

The party’s legislative plan is disturbing as it calls for abolishing the two key labor reforms that were introduced in recent years ― the time-off system and the simplification of bargaining windows at companies with multiple trade unions.

The time-off system was put in place in July 2010, banning the time-old practice of an employer fully remunerating workers who were engaged exclusively in trade union affairs.

Under the system, a maximum time-off limit is set to allow ordinary union-affiliated workers to conduct trade union-related affairs, such as collective bargaining, without loss of wages.

The time-off system has now firmly taken hold in Korea. According to the Ministry of Employment and Labor, it is in place at 98.8 percent of workplaces with more than 100 employees.

Yet the DUP plans to revise the law to make the remuneration of full-time trade union officers subject to a collective agreement between management and labor.

If the current formula is modified as planned by the DUP, it would end up reverting to the old practice. Most employers would not be able to withstand labor pressure to pay wages to full-time union officers.

The party’s scheme would benefit trade unions. But it would hold back a key labor reform.

Meanwhile, the simplification of bargaining windows is a procedure designed to minimize the potential negative effects of a multiple trade union system.

Under the current law, if two or more trade unions exist at a workplace, trade unions are required to determine a representative union that has the authority to bargain and make a collective agreement with the employer. When they fail to agree on this, the largest union gets the bargaining authority.

The DUP plans to make the simplification procedure noncompulsory on the grounds that it tends to ignore the interests of smaller trade unions.

According to the Ministry of Employment and Labor, the simplification procedure has already taken root, although barely one year has passed since the multiple trade union system was introduced in July 2011. The ministry says more than 97 percent of the multiple unions across the nation practice it.

If bargaining windows are not simplified, competition among trade unions would intensify, hurting unity among workers and shaking the very foundation of the multiple union system. It would also increase the burden on management to undertake collective bargaining with unions.

We suspect that the DUP’s new labor initiative was motivated by its desire to win support from workers in the coming presidential election. Yet the party should realize that its misguided attempt to overhaul the current time-off and multiple union systems would pour cold water on efforts to stabilize labor-management relations in Korea. If industrial relations become unstable, it would do more harm than good to worker welfare.

There is one more thing that the party needs to remember ― politicians should be careful not to intervene in labor disputes of individual companies.

The party’s lawmakers on the Environment and Labor Committee of the National Assembly are moving to set up a subcommittee to address disputes at Ssangyong Motor and Samsung Electronics.

But the involvement of politicians in labor issues of individual companies could make matters worse. It is the concerned parties of a company who know their problems best. Politicians should limit their role to encouraging them to reach an accord and implement it faithfully.