Ruling party must end its indecision on workweek exemptions

The Democratic Party's competing bills expose hesitation over labor rules crucial to major industrial projects.

The ruling Democratic Party (DP) plans to introduce two conflicting bills supporting major industrial projects, differing on whether to exempt certain workers from the 52-hour workweek limit. One would allow exemptions for highly paid employees and research and development personnel, while the other would retain existing restrictions. It is difficult to find a precedent for a governing party simultaneously proposing contradictory legislation on such a contentious issue.

On Tuesday, the DP introduced a bill through the National Assembly's Political Affairs Committee to establish special industrial zones spanning multiple regions, including exemptions from the 52-hour workweek. Yet its Environment and Labor Committee members reportedly plan to submit another version without the exemptions.

DP floor leader Han Byung-do said the party would gather opinions from various sectors and develop a final proposal through a combined legislative review. He emphasized the need for deliberation and discussion.

But does granting limited exemptions to highly paid professionals and research and development workers in designated industrial zones really require such prolonged hesitation?

Competing economies already operate comparable systems, including the United States' white-collar exemptions and Japan's highly professional worker system.

Moreover, more than four months have passed since the government's megaproject initiative was announced. President Lee Jae Myung has repeatedly called for an approach going beyond a speed campaign to an all-out offensive.

Invoking deliberation now appears less like a genuine effort to build consensus than an attempt to avoid confrontation with the country's two major labor union confederations and the party's hard-line supporters.

The government is urging businesses to undertake enormous investments involving substantial risks, yet the ruling party remains reluctant to pursue even modest labor deregulation. Such inconsistency is irresponsible.

The government and ruling party have also used public consultation to postpone decisions beyond labor policy.

The Climate, Energy and Environment Ministry has deferred a decision on constructing new nuclear power plants, referring the matter to three months of public deliberation even as electricity supply emerges as a critical bottleneck in the artificial intelligence era.

Similarly, the government abruptly suspended preparations to apply for membership in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, despite the urgent need to overcome rising protectionist trade barriers.

These delays raise questions about whether the administration is prepared to make difficult economic choices. Consultation matters, but it cannot become a substitute for decisions when industrial competitiveness and future investment are at stake.

The responsibility of the government and ruling party is not to keep testing public reactions before making decisions. It is to exercise leadership, make necessary choices and persuade stakeholders of their merits.

(END)

[ⓒ K-VIBE. 무단전재-재배포 금지]