The government’s labor reform drive has hit a major snag, as the labor representative of the tripartite dialogue with management and the government declared Tuesday the breakdown of a landmark agreement reached in September.

The Federation of Korean Trade Unions, which represented the labor side at the tripartite social dialogue, also said it would not participate in future talks.

FKTU chairman Kim Dong-man said in a news conference that the Sept. 15 agreement, which was hailed as a historic accord, has turned into “a mere scrap of paper, as the government trampled on it.”

He noted that the government damaged the spirit of the agreement when it submitted five labor reform bills to the National Assembly just one day after the agreement was concluded, since two of the bills were not based on the accord.

Furthermore, he said, the government unilaterally disclosed the drafts of the two controversial labor guidelines it has sought to rewrite, breaching its promise to hold close consultations with the FKTU in advance.

Declaring the breakdown of the social dialogue, Kim said the FKTU would resist the government’s attempt to implement the revised guidelines through a legal fight and by campaigning against candidates from the ruling Saenuri Party in the coming general election.

The government, for its part, said it would push ahead with the enforcement of the revised guidelines without seeking further dialogue with the FKTU.

The two sides are both to blame for the collapse of the tripartite dialogue. As Kim pointed out, the government did make a critical mistake in the process to legislate its reform bills. It pushed hard to enact the five bills as a package, including the two bills that were not covered by the tripartite agreement. But it was an ill-advised attempt that simply infuriated the FKTU.

The labor organization cannot escape its share of the blame either. It took issue with the government’s unilateral disclosure of the drafts of the two guidelines, but it had no intention of endorsing them in the first place.

One of the guidelines is intended to make the labor market more flexible by allowing companies to dismiss underperforming employees based on an objective performance assessment.

The FKTU’s opposition to this guideline is understandable, as it would reduce employment security. But it should acknowledge the need to relax the current requirements for dismissal, as they are too stringent.

The other guideline is intended to make it easier for companies to introduce the wage peak system in conjunction with the extension of the minimum retirement age to 60.

The federation’s objection to this guideline is unreasonable, as the minimum retirement age was extended on the assumption that employees would agree to the introduction of the wage peak system.

The walkout of the FKTU has dimmed the prospect of the ongoing labor reform drive. The government is likely to face stiff resistance from unions in implementing its reform measures, including the two guidelines.

The government needs to make continued efforts to reactivate the tripartite dialogue. The FKTU has declared it would not participate in the dialogue, but it stopped short of declaring its outright withdrawal from it.

If past experience is anything to go by, the labor organization is expected to come back to the negotiating table sometime after the general election. The government should show patience. It should not let the landmark agreement end up in the trash.