[Focus] What caused the KEPCO union's turnaround?

The Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) labor union reversed its stance to withhold its threatened strike in the wee hours of Nov. 24. Prior to that, many considered it difficult for the union to mount a strike at this time. But the odds were even because the government had been adamant and the union could not find a ready excuse to call off the strike.

Mediators from the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) worked hard to persuade the representatives of both government and labor behind the scenes, and succeeded in bringing both sides around to an agreement that the period of mediation should be extended and the government should try to delay the National Assembly deliberation of the bill on restructuring the electric industry in the meantime. It boded well for a breakthrough.

The torturous last-ditch negotiations among representatives of the commission, the government and the union led KEPCO President Choi Soo-Byong and KEPCO union leader Oh Kyong-Ho to sign a note of compromise at 4:50 in the morning. There could have been a point of no return. The union head tore up the agreement in the presence of the press to protest the absence of Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy Shin Kook-Hwan. When Shin arrived on the scene at around 6:30, the labor representative softened his stance and declared that the strike would be delayed -- at 6:50.

The two parties to the dispute earned five days until Nov. 29. Oh said the strike is only postponed and will start on Nov. 30 unless the union demands are met by that time. They will resume talks on Nov. 25 after a one-day breathing spell. However, it is next to impossible for the government to change its policy to privatize KEPCO. Officials appear now to have won the upper hand in pushing ahead with the reform drive by implementing thorough restructuring of the public sector. The five days allowed are too short for the opposing sides to find middle ground.

In case the bargaining fails, will the trade union embark on a strike as threatened? Lee Kyung-Ho, the public relations director of the KEPCO, said it might be untimely for the union to go on a strike now that the Commerce, Industry, and Energy Committee of the National Assembly has delayed its examination of the bill for the privatization of the KEPCO, but added there is no alternative but to strike if their demands are not accepted.

Other analysts view that the union may seek to derive the greatest possible practical gains from the five days of negotiations since the privatization of the power industry is the trend of the times and has to be accepted given the circumstances. Among such gains are no layoffs of employees and continued adherence to the working conditions agreed on with the management through collective bargaining. Some say that it is hard to close the ranks to take a firm unified stand and carry out the strike.

A prevailing interpretation holds that the withholding of the KEPCO strike dampened the fever of labor¡¯s ¡°winter struggle.¡± On the other hand, the optimism is refuted by the alliance of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) and the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU), which decided to form a joint committee to stage a general labor struggle.

Lee Jong-Shik, FKTU's external cooperation office director, points out diverse factors influencing the winter offensive of labor such as the alliance of the two major union groups and the future direction of government policy and party politics. The KEPCO union can hardly give up its militant stance and the labor struggle will continue to be waged in different ways depending on the conditions of respective workplaces, according to Lee.

Jung Young-Gwan yongari@donga.com