The Supreme Court ruled that Kumho Tire does not have to directly employ contractor workers who handled cooking and meal service at its in-house cafeteria. An appellate court had earlier said Kumho Tire must directly employ the workers, but the Supreme Court reversed that decision.
The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Ma Yong-ju) said on the 2nd it overturned the case and sent it back to the Gwangju High Court with a ruling unfavorable to the workers in a labor lawsuit filed by five employees of a subcontractor working at the cafeteria of Kumho Tire's Gokseong plant against Kumho Tire. The workers will receive another lower court ruling 10 years after filing the suit.
The cafeteria workers filed suit arguing that Kumho Tire must directly employ them because they purchased ingredients and then cooked and served meals based on a weekly menu provided by a Kumho Tire dietitian.
The first trial ruled against the workers. The first-trial panel said, "The weekly menu represented the exercise of a minimum level of directive authority to achieve the purpose and outcome of the subcontract." It added, "It is hard to see it as an instruction that constrained the work itself, such as setting the order or timing of tasks."
However, the appellate court found that Kumho Tire must directly employ the workers. The appellate panel said, "Kumho Tire directly hired a dietitian to select menus and to purchase and inspect ingredients, thereby directly determining the expense needed to operate the in-house cafeteria and the quality of the food, while the subcontractor could not arbitrarily change the set menu."
The Supreme Court overturned the appellate ruling. The court said, "It is difficult to find that a Kumho Tire dietitian and others exercised substantial direction and command—such as issuing binding instructions regarding the performance of the work itself—beyond specifically designating the scope of duties." It also said, "The main duties of the subcontractor's employees—cooking and meal service—are clearly distinct from Kumho Tire's core business of tire manufacturing and production," and "It is insufficient to recognize that the subcontractor's employees were substantially integrated into Kumho Tire's business."