A senior manager who had been disciplined for falsely claiming overtime pay at the Financial Supervisory Service ran in the election for the 14th FSS union chairperson. Some inside the FSS say that if an employee with a disciplinary record rises to one of the positions representing the FSS, it would undermine the agency's authority in the market.
On the 17th, according to the FSS, the final candidates for the FSS union chairperson election were confirmed as two senior managers, A and B. The election is a process to choose a successor to Jeong Yu-seok, the 13th chairperson, who resigned early. Jeong stepped down in Jan., with three months left in the term, after employees passed a no-confidence (dismissal) motion against the union chairperson by vote.
A senior manager was found to have been disciplined in the past for improperly receiving overtime pay. Although A left work after 6 p.m. and did not perform duties, A reportedly collected about 5 million won in night-shift pay by leaving a computer on. In an internal audit in 2016, the FSS detected this and imposed a six-month suspension from duties.
Inside the FSS, there is criticism over A senior manager's run for union chairperson. One official said, "If the union chairperson, who must represent employees and engage internally and externally, is someone who had issues, it completely conflicts with the values of the FSS."
Last year, A served as the FSS emergency committee chair and emerged as a candidate for the next union chairperson. A also receives positive reviews for leading FSS rallies and protests and for helping persuade political circles to withdraw a reorganization plan to separate the FSS's consumer protection function and a plan to designate the FSS as a public institution.
Noise has also arisen over the election procedures. The claim is that procedures proceeded despite a failure to meet the quorum for resolutions by the union's election management committee. Four of the six committee members reportedly resigned recently. There are even calls to file for an injunction in court to suspend the effectiveness of guidelines issued by the committee—such as the campaign period and methods—arguing they are unfair.