근로기준법상 휴일제도에 관한 검토 - 주휴일 제도를 중심으로 -

김홍석 강원대학교 비교법학연구소 2022 江原法學 Vol.68 No.-

Unlike the ILO Convention, which is an international standard, and the EU's guidelines, the main holidays of the Labor Standards Act are defined as paid. As a regular rest system, the main holiday aims to provide workers with opportunities for mental and physical rest and to enjoy cultural life among family and social members. Looking at the legislative examples related to weekly holidays, it is common to grant one day of rest per week as a paid. However, since the main holiday system under the Labor Standards Act is a holiday that is granted as a “paid” only when the requirements for opening work for one week are met, it would be most appropriate to describe the legal nature of the main holiday system. If so, it is necessary to clarify why the weekly holiday system under the Labor Standards Act is operated financially in addition to time guarantee, and whether it is legally valid. To examine these problems, this paper reviewed the validity of the dual nature of the weekly holiday system through a review of the overall structure of the holiday system, the type and system of the holiday system, and each requirement of the holiday system. In addition, in the process of this review, the purpose of monetary compensation, which is one of the characteristics of the weekly holiday system, is not clear, and the areas that are differentially defined according to the type of employment, such as ultra-short-time workers, were reviewed. 「근로기준법」의 주휴일은 국제기준인 ILO협약 및 EU의 지침과는 달리, 유급으로 규정되어 있다. 주휴일은 정기적인 휴식제도로서 정기적으로 휴식을 부여하여 근로자들에게 정신·육체의 휴식 기회를 제공하고 가족 및 사회구성원간의 문화적 생활을 향유하는 것에 그 목적을 두고 있다. 주휴일과 관련한 입법례를 살펴보면 1주에 1일의 휴식을 유급으로 부여하는 것이 보편적인 실정이다. 하지만 「근로기준법」상 주휴일 제도는 1주간 개근의 요건을 충족해야만 ‘유급’으로 부여되는 휴일이므로, 주휴일 제도의 법적 성격을 설명하는데 있어서 휴식시간 보장의 성격과 금전 보상의 성격이 혼재되어 있는 휴일제도라는 표현이 가장 적절할 것이다. 그렇다면 「근로기준법」상 주휴일 제도는 국제기준 또는 다른 나라의 입법례와 다르게 시간보장에 더해 금전 보상적으로 운용되는 이유가 무엇인지, 법적 타당성이 있는지 명확하게 규명될 필요가 있다. 이러한 문제점들을 살펴보기 위해 본 논문에서는 휴일제도의 전체적인 구조와 휴일의 유형과 체계, 휴일제도의 각 요건별 검토를 통하여 주휴일 제도의 이중적 성격의 타당성에 관한 검토를 수행하였다. 또한, 이러한 검토 과정에서 주휴일 제도의 성격중 하나인 금전보상 성격이 목적으로 하는 바가 명확하지 않으며, 초단시간근로자 등 고용 형태에 따라 차별적으로 규정 되어 있는 부분에 대하여 검토하였다.

휴일 제도의 개선방안

강성태 ( Kang Seong-tae ) 법과사회이론학회 2017 법과 사회 Vol.0 No.54

실근로시간의 단축 또는 장시간 노동 체제에서 정상 노동 체제로의 전환은 우리사회의 가장 시급한 과제에 속한다. 이를 위해 무엇보다 먼저 휴일이 근로자의 피로회복과 여가 확보를 위한 휴식 제도로서 기능할 수 있도록 해야 한다. 이 글은 해석론과 입법론 두 측면에서 「근로기준법」상 휴일 제도의 개선 방안을 알아보는데 목적이 있다. 해석론에서는 최근 실무상 쟁점이 되고 있는 휴일근로와 연장근로의 관계를 집중적으로 살펴보았다. 고용노동부의 현행 행정지침 등 휴일근로와 연장근로를 별개로 파악하는 견해는, 이론적으로도 타당하지 않고 또 현실적으로도 장시간 근로를 조장하는 원인이 되고 있다. 현행 「근로기준법」의 체계적이고 합리적인 해석으로서는 1주 40시간을 넘는 휴일근로는 동시에 연장근로로서 두 근로에 대한 가산임금을 각각 계산하여 지급하는 것, 즉 중복할증 하는 것이 맞다. 그러나 이러한 해석론만으로 휴일근로 문제를 해결하기에는 한계가 있다. 장시간 노동의 극복을 위해서는 휴일근로를 효과적으로 제한할 수 있는 입법적 개선이 함께 이루어져야 한다. 먼저 주휴일을 특정하고 주휴일의 근로는 법령상 예외를 제외하고는 원칙적으로 금지해야 한다. 둘째, 예외적으로 이루어진 주휴일의 근로에 대해서는 시간보상을 원칙으로 하고, 주휴일이 아닌 휴일의 근로는 당사자의 합의로 허용하되 그에 대한 보상은 금전이나 시간으로 정하도록 해야 한다. 셋째, 휴일근로나 그것을 포함한 연장근로의 기간별 상한을 설정하도록 해야 한다. One of the most important things in the Korean labor law is to to shorten working time in reality. This paper aims to review recent debate about relationship between overtime work and holiday work by recommending a reformation of statutory holiday under the Labor Standards Act(hereafter `the Act`). The first half of this paper focuses on discussing the following point; how should holiday working hours should be considered when calculating overtime hours? The following can be concluded: Holiday working hours should be included in overtime hours, and employees should be paid an extra premium if holiday work is regarded as overtime. The second half of this essay is composed of the recommendation of amendments for weekly holiday system under the Act as followings. First, weekly holiday should be Sunday and the working of that day has to be prohibited, in principle. Second, in holidays excepts for Sunday might be permitted to work by a worker`s agreement. Third, holiday working should be rewarded not by money, but by time, in principle.

근로기준법상 휴일과 연차휴가에 관한 소고

강성태 사법발전재단 2015 사법 Vol.1 No.34

An Essay on Holidays and Annual Leave under the Labor Standards Act Kang, Seong-tae This essay aims to examine holidays and annual leave which is a frequent topic of heated debate among the leave system prescribed under the Labor Standards Act (hereinafter “the Act”). To this end, this paper begins with exploring the meaning of “rest” under an employment contract, closely looking at issues pertaining to Korea’s leave system, and comparing Korea’s leave system to international labor standards. The main part of this essay centers on discussing the following points: Is there a conceptual and legal difference between a weekly holiday and holiday? How should holiday working hours be considered when calculating overtime hours? What is holiday work in which employees are provided additional wage, and is additional wage paid when working while on annual leave? How does attendance rate factor in when calculating annual leave entitlements? How is annual leave calculated during the period of industrial action? One of the most pressing challenges for the Korean labor market is to normalize work hours. To make this happen, Korea’s leave system needs to be operated in line with its original intent, i.e., protecting the health of employees and ensuring leisure time. Working hours and rest are fundamental elements of an employment contract, and a prerequisite for a sustainable society. In order for the leave system to properly function, monetary compensation for taking time off work should not be the focal point in labor-management negotiations. Furthermore, statutory interpretations on holidays and annual leave should focus more on employees’ entitlement to take leave rather than compensatory benefits. Based on the preliminary findings, the following can be concluded: (i) Working seven consecutive days should be strictly regulated under the Act. (ii) Holiday working hours should be included in overtime hours, and employees should be paid an extra premium if holiday work is regarded as overtime. (iii) Holiday work under an employment contract should be interpreted as days in which employees are not obligated to work pursuant to relevant statutes, collective agreement, employment rules, etc. Working while on annual leave, namely on a specific date chosen by an employee, should be regarded as holiday work in which additional wage is provided. Annual leave should be considered as an employee’s entitlement to take time off from work in line with international labor standards. (iv) Legal attendance rate under the Act should be regarded as an element for calculating annual leave allowance and not annual leave in itself (the latter requires legislative revision). (v) Period of lawful industrial actions, etc. should be excluded from actual working days when calculating attendance rate. 이 글은 근로기준법상 휴식 제도 중에서 현실적으로 분쟁이 잦은 휴일 및 연차휴가와 관련된 몇 가지 쟁점을 살펴보는 데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 먼저 해석론을 위한 사전적 검토로서 휴식이 근로계약에서 가지는 의미와 우리나라 휴식제도의 문제점을 살펴보고 국제노동기준과 우리 휴식제도를 비교하여 보았다. 본론에서는 휴일과 연차휴가에 관련하여, “주휴일과 휴일의 관계는 어떠한가? 휴일근로의 시간 수(數)는 연장근로의 시간 수 계산에서 어떻게 취급하여야 하는가? 가산임금의 지급 대상이 되는 휴일근로란 무엇인가? 여기에는 연차휴가일의 근로도 포함되는가? 연차휴가권의 발생이나 연차휴가일수 산정과 출근율의 관계는 어떠한가? 특히 파업기간은 어떻게 처리하여야 하는가?” 등을 중점적으로 살펴보았다. 우리 사회의 긴박한 과제 중 하나가 장시간 노동 체제로부터 정상적인 노동 체제로의 전환이다. 이를 위해서는 우리의 휴식제도가 근로자의 건강보호와 여가시간 확보라는 본래의 취지에 맞게 운영되도록 해야 한다. 휴식은 근로시간과 함께 근로계약의 본질적 요소로서 우리 사회의 지속가능성을 위한 필수적 전제이다. 휴식이 제 기능을 발휘하려면 무엇보다 휴식을 금전적 보상으로 전환하는 노사의 담합을 배제하여야 한다. 휴일과 연차휴가에 관한 법 해석에서도 관련 규정상 근로 보상적 성격을 최대한 탈각시키고 휴식 보장적 성격이 드러나도록 해야 한다. 해석의 방향은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 1주일에 하루는 반드시 휴일로 보장되도록 벌칙 규정을 제대로 적용해야 한다. 둘째, 휴일근로의 시간 수도 연장근로의 시간 수에 포함시키는 것이 맞으므로 휴일근로가 동시에 연장근로가 되는 경우에는 중복 가산한 할증임금을 지급해야 한다. 셋째, 가산임금의 대상이 되는 휴일근로에는 법령 또는 단체협약, 취업규칙 등을 통해 근로계약상 근로의무가 없는 날, 즉 모든 휴일의 근로가 포함된다고 해석함이 옳다. 또한 연차휴가일의 근로 중에서 특히 근로자가 시기지정권을 행사하여 특정된 휴가일의 근로는 그 성격이나 기능이 휴일과 실질적으로 다르지 않으므로 가산임금의 지급 대상인 휴일근로로 보아야 할 것이다. 마지막으로 연차휴가제도는 국제노동기준에 맞게 휴식 보장적인 제도로 바꾸어야 한다. 입법적 개선이 필요하겠으나, 우선은 근로기준법상 법정 출근율을 연차휴가 자체가 아니라 연차휴가수당의 요건으로만 해석하는 것이 바람직하다. 그리고 정당한 파업 기간 등은 출근율 계산에서 소정근로일에서 제외하는 것이 옳다.

휴일제도에 있어 근로조건 자율결정의 원칙과 한계

하갑래(河甲來) 서울대학교 노동법연구회 2009 노동법연구 Vol.0 No.27

The holiday system has changed little over the past 56 years since it was first established under the Labor Standards Act in 1953. So now it not only fails to respond to changes in the labor market but also has many structural problems piling up during its implementation. First, related provisions are scattered across various laws and regulations, without providing a clear definition of holiday. This causes confusion on how to apply statutory holidays and agreed holidays. Second, since a weekly holiday comes with pay only when the worker has perfect attendance during the week, it is difficult to calculate wages for absentees, part-time workers, etc. Third, there is no clear standard for granting weekly holidays, including the number of holiday hours, the interval at which they are granted, and a substitute for weekly holidays. Fourth, there is a huge controversy over the conditions one should meet to take a weekly holiday and the method of calculating holiday wages. Fifth, official holidays are recognized as agreed holidays (holidays granted under company rules), undermining the principle of equality and fairness. To address these problems, the Labor Standards Act has so far relied on court precedents, administrative interpretations and interpretations of relevant academic theories. However, such interpretations often present conflicting views, exposing their limitations in solving confusion in the labor market. In recent years, the paradigm of the Labor Standards Act has shifted to pursuing reconciliation between work and family life. This change is expected to increase interest in the holiday system among workers, employers and the government. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a logically consistent and unified standard to deal with the structural contradictions that have appeared during the implementation of the holiday system. The new direction the holiday system will take should be towards making clear the principle of autonomously setting working conditions and its limitations. Furthermore, to solve the structural problems with the dismissal system, as well as the enactment of a special law, an alternative legislative theory needs to be considered.

근로기준법상 휴식 제도의 개정

강성태(姜成泰) 서울대학교 노동법연구회 2016 노동법연구 Vol.0 No.41

이 글은 근로기준법상 휴식 제도의 개정 방향에 관한 입법론이다. 휴식은 근로시간과 함께 근로계약의 본질적 요소로서 우리 사회의 지속가능성을 위한 필수적 전제이다. 휴식 제도는 ‘근로보상에서 휴식보장으로’ 바뀌어야 한다. 장시간 노동 체제로부터 정상 노동 체제로의 전환을 위해서는 휴식 제도를 근로자의 건강보호와 여가시간 확보라는 본래의 취지에 맞게 운영되도록 해야 하는데, 특히 휴식을 금전적 보상으로 전환하는 노사의 담합을 배제하여야 한다. 이를 위해 입법적으로 개정이 필요한 사항은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 일간휴식 제도를 신설하여 원칙적으로 근로자에게 연속하는 11시간 이상의 일간휴식을 보장한다. 둘째, 휴일과 관련해서는, ① 주휴일과 그 밖의 휴일을 구별하고, ② 1주에 6일을 초과하는 근로는 원칙적으로 금지하며, ③ 주휴일은 일간휴식에 더하여 연속하는 24시간 이상으로 특정 요일에 정기적으로 부여하고, ④ 무급을 원칙으로 한다. 셋째, 연차휴가와 관련해서는 ① 권리부여의 요건을 6개월 근속으로만 하되, 그 미만의 근로자에게는 비례적으로 휴가일을 부여하고, ② 연차휴가는 근로자의 청구(시기지정)가 있을 때 부여하는 것이 아니라 사용자가 의무적으로 부여하도록 하며, ③ 미사용휴가에 대한 금전보상은 원칙적으로 금지한다. One of the most important things in the Korean labor law is to normalize legal system of work hours and rest. Working hours and rest are fundamental elements of an employment contract, and a prerequisite for a sustainable society. In order for the leave system to properly function, monetary compensation for taking time off work should not be the focal point in labor-management negotiations. Furthermore, statutory amendments on rest systems under the Labor Standards Act(hereafter ‘the Act’) should focus more on employees" entitlement to take leave rather than compensatory benefits as followings. First, daily rest should be introduced to the Act in order to secure workers" daily time off and to limit daily maximum of working time. Second, working seven consecutive days should be strictly prevented under the Act. Third, annual leave systems should be revised in line with international labor standards. In order for this, for example, legal attendance rate for annual leave under the Act should not be regarded as an element for annual leave in itself.

주 5일제 근무와 비정규근로

金哉勳(Jae-Hoon Kim) 한림대학교 법학연구소 2003 한림법학 FORUM Vol.12 No.-

The annual regular and actual working-hours in Korea have been fairly long when compared with those in the advanced industrial nations. In Oct. 2002, the government submitted the National Assembly a revision bill of the Labor Standards Act concerning working hour reduction and improvement of leave system. Regarding the government's legislative bill, labor and business circles have demanded to rediscuss the issue. The government is struggling to convince labor, management and political parties of the need for early legislation. The legal points at issue concerning working hour reduction include specific ways of maintaining current wages, remuneration rates for overtime work, implimentation time schedule, etc. The core of these points is that what is effective plan for actual working hour reduction. For this purpose, the government should rationally adjust the number of holidays and promote the use of leave; provide civil service without causing inconveniences to the public; expand infrastructures such as cultural and leisure facilities. Meanwhile, the number of irregular (atypical) workers has sharply increased since the economic crisis in 1997. As a result, there have emerged such problems as discrimination against irregular workers in working conditions; a weak social safety net for irregular workers; illegal and unlawful acts committed against irregular workers. The legal points at issue concerning irregular workers include the regulation on the use of fixed-term employment, temporary agency work, and part-time workers. In order to lessen job precariousness among fixed-term workers, the ways to allow companies to hire irregular workers only when they have particular reasons and to prohibit companies from dismissing these workers just because their contract period expires, in case the companies have hired them for longer than a certain period, are explored. And various efforts are made to reduce illegal temporary agency work, and to restrict the continuous use of temporary agency workers for particular jobs by replacing one with another. Excessive overtime work for part-time workers can be restricted by setting the maximum overtime hours and making an additional payment for the overtime work.

주휴일 제도에 관한 국제노동기준과 한국법의 비교법적 검토

조용만 한국노동법학회 2022 노동법학 Vol.- No.82

The purpose of this article is to examine the international labor standards regarding weekly rest and to suggest improvement tasks through comparison with Korean law. The basic principles of weekly rest that can be derived from international labor standards are universality of weekly rest, regularity, continuity and uniformity of at least 24 hours of weekly rest during a period of seven days, coincidence with the days established by tradition or custom, consideration for religious minorities, restrictions on work during weekly rest, and granting compensatory rest in all cases of authorized exemption from the basic 24-hour weekly rest rule. According to the Labor Standards Act, the characteristics of Korea's weekly holiday system are as follows. The categories of workers excluded from the application of weekly holidays are relatively broad. Paid weekly rest of at least one day is granted on condition that you have been to work on all the days you are scheduled to work during the week. Weekly rest day is not specified by law, and companies can voluntarily decide on weekly holidays. There is no stipulation as to whether working during weekly rest is permitted or whether compensatory rest should be granted in case of working during weekly rest. The tasks to improve the weekly holiday system under the Labor Standards Act are as follows. First, in order to establish the universality of weekly holidays, the scope of workers excluded from the application of the weekly rest system should be reduced, and the current regulation of “one day or more on average per week” should be changed to “at least one day every week' to better conform to the regularity of weekly rest. Second, in order to meet the request for the uniformity of weekly rest and conformity with traditional and customary rest days, it should be forced to stipulate a weekly rest day in the workplace rules, and if no specific day is stipulated, the day of weekly rest shall be regarded as Sunday, but exceptions shall be allowed for religious minorities. Third, work during weekly rest should be permitted as a condition of granting an compensatory rest within an appropriate period in special cases where it is always or temporarily unavoidable. In this case, the right of workers to refuse to work during weekly rest and to choose a compensatory rest day should be guaranteed. Finally, although unpaid weekly rest helps to promote the improvement of weekly rest system, it should be carefully reviewed in consideration of the history of the paid weekly rest system, the confidence in its system of members of society, and the side effects or adverse effects of unpaid weekly rest system.

주휴제도에 관한 논의와 쟁점

김홍석(Kim, Hong Suk) 한국노동법학회 2021 노동법학 Vol.- No.79

주휴일 제도의 입법적 개선방안

김홍석 한국노동법학회 2023 노동법학 Vol.- No.85

The paradigm of the labor market is changing rapidly. ‘Work and rest’ is a concern for both users and workers. Nevertheless, the weekly holiday system of the Labor Standards Act still maintains the framework of the early industrialization era that protects workers from excessive labor. The Labor Standards Act was revised in 2018 to reduce working hours, but there is still no significant change in the basic framework. The reduction of working hours can achieve its purpose completely when the holiday system is specifically realized. The rest system stipulated in the Labor Standards Act is operated anomalously in various forms in the labor reality. In particular, many parts of the method of granting holidays are delegated to the theory of interpretation. The rest system, which is far from reality, does not meet the minimum standards necessary for workers' lives, such as recovery from fatigue and health from continuous work. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the rest system stipulated in the Labor Standards Act, and among them, the regulations related to the holiday system are embodied and realized. The weekly holiday system of the Labor Standards Act has both the nature of monetary compensation and the nature of rest time guarantee, and the establishment of ‘one week’ as a guarantee requirement for paid weekly holidays is a representative sign of the nature of monetary compensation. However, defining and rewarding certain requirements for rest as well as the weekly holiday system arises as an obstacle in terms of guaranteeing rest, a prerequisite for balancing work and rest. In order to solve this problem, the nature of monetary compensation, one of the two characteristics of the weekly holiday system, must be eliminated, and a social universal holiday with only the nature of guaranteeing rest time should be established. In order for the weekly holiday system of the Labor Standards Act to be further realized and embodied, there are numerous tasks to be solved. Legislative supplementation is needed to resolve the national goal of reducing working hours and the demands of the times of “harmony between work and rest.”

주휴수당 폐지를 위한 제도 개선 연구

김홍석 ( Kim Hongsuk ) 연세법학회 2023 연세법학 Vol.41 No.-

유급 주휴일에 지급되는 임금, 즉 주휴수당을 둘러싼 논의가 뜨겁다. 윤석열 정부의 3대 개혁안 중 노동 개혁, 그 중 주휴수당의 폐지에 관해 학계와 노동계 모두에게 초미의 관심사가 되고 있다. 미래 노동 시장 연구회가 2022년 12월 12일에 발표한 권고문의 주휴수당과 관련한 내용을 살펴보면, ‘주휴수당’은 근로시간 및 임금 산정을 복잡하게 만드는 원인이 되고 ‘15시간 미만’의 쪼개기 계약을 유인하는 원인으로 폐지되어야 한다는 의견을 제시하고 있다. 또한, 주휴수당을 비롯한 임금제도 전반에 대한 개선안을 권고하는 내용을 담고 있다. 본 논문은 이러한 쟁점들에 착안하여 주휴수당의 문제점을 살펴본 후, 해결방안을 찾는 것을 목적으로 한다. 우선적으로 주휴수당의 임금 해당 여부를 판례와 학설을 중심으로 살펴본다. 임금을 근로의 대가(代價)라고 정의하고 있는 현행 근로기준법에서는 주휴수당의 성격과 관련하여 논란의 여지가 발생할 수 있다. 이에 따라 임금의 본질에 대해 살펴본 후, 주휴수당의 성격이 임금에 해당하는지 검토한다. 또한, 주휴수당의 산입 여부와 관련하여 항상 논란이 되는 통상임금, 최저임금과의 관계를 살펴본다. 통상임금과 관련하여 주휴수당이 통상임금에 포함되는지, 월 통상수당에 유급 휴일에 대한 임금 포함 여부를 판례를 중심으로 살펴본다. 최저임금과 관련해서는 최저임금 계산 방법과 시행령 개정의 배경에 대하여 살펴본다. 이를 토대로, 2018년 개정 법령 및 판례를 중심으로 주휴수당과 관련된 최저임금 산입범위에 대하여 검토한다. 주휴수당은 복잡한 계산방식과 일급제 근로자 및 1주 15시간 미만 근로자에게는 지급되지 않는 규정들로 인해 그 자체로 많은 문제점을 내재하고 있다. 이러한 문제점을 해결하기 위해서는 유급 주휴일을 무급화(주휴수당 폐지)하는 동시에 근로자들의 기존 소득을 보전해주는 방안으로 그 해결책을 찾아야 한다. Discussions over wages paid on paid weekly holidays, that is, weekly holiday allowances, are hot. Among the three major reforms of the Yoon Suk Yeoln government, labor reform, including the abolition of the weekly holiday allowance, is of keen interest to both academia and the labor community. According to the recommendation issued by the Future Labor Market Research Association on December 12, 2022, it suggests that the “week-off allowance” should be abolished as a cause of complicating the calculation of working hours and wages and inducing “less than 15 hours” of split contracts. It is also recommended to improve the overall wage system, including weekly holiday allowances. The purpose of this paper is to find a solution after examining the problems of the weekly holiday allowance focusing on these problems. First, we examine whether the weekly holiday allowance corresponds to wages, focusing on precedents and theories. Controversy may arise over the nature of weekly holiday allowances in the current Labor Standards Act, which stipulates wages as a consideration for labor. Therefore, after examining the nature of wages, review whether the nature of weekly holiday allowances corresponds to wages. In addition, we look at the relationship between the ordinary wage and the minimum wage, which is always controversial regarding whether or not the weekly holiday allowance is included. Regarding ordinary wages, we examine whether the weekly holiday allowance is included in ordinary wages and whether the monthly allowance includes wages for paid holidays. Regarding the minimum wage, we will look at the method of calculating the minimum wage and the background of the revision of the enforcement ordinance. Based on this, the scope of calculating the minimum wage related to the weekly holiday allowance is reviewed, focusing on the 2018 laws and precedents revised in 2018. There are many problems due to the complex calculation methods and regulations that the weekly holiday allowance itself is not paid to daily wage workers and workers less than 15 hours a week. To solve this problem, it is necessary to find a solution by making paid weekly holidays unpaid (abolition of weekly holiday allowances) while preserving the existing income of workers.