Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Korean content industry has long been exempt from working time regulations due to the creative nature of the profession. However, in promulgating an amendment to the country’s 1997 Labor Standard Act, the exemption of the working time regulations for this industry was revoked in 2018. Even though the amendment slashes the maximum weekly work hours to 52 from 68 hours—in order to improve work-life balance among its workers and enhance labor productivity—many conflicts and much confusion still exist, because more realistic and concrete institutional measures are not yet supported. In this regard, this research aims to examine how major North American and European countries including the U.K, U.S, Canada, France and Germany implement their working time regulations for the content industry by focusing on the collective agreements between their major content industry unions and employers. In order to systematically examine each country’s collective agreements between its major unions and employers, this study analyzes the issue through six different comparative analysis frames: 1) whether the content industry is classified as an exemption from the working time regulations; 2) how the work time is defined; 3) whether there is an agreement on the maximum daily working hours; 4) whether there is an agreement on the maximum weekly working hours, 5) how the issue of criminal punishment and treatment in the case of violation of the given agreement is treated; and 6) who represents the main parties of the agreement. Based on this comparative analysis, the study then scrutinizes the collective agreements of Broadcasting, Entertainment, Cinematography and Theatre Union (BECTU) in the U.K, Directors Guilds in America (DGA) in the U.S, the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA) and Canadian Media Guilds (CMG) in Canada, Les Monteurs Associes in France, and TV FFS and NV Buhne in Germany. Regardless of differences among the sampled countries, this research reveals three main trends and major characteristics commonly found in terms of 1) insurance of workers' rights, 2) enhancement of regulative flexibility reflecting the specificity of the content industry, and 3) securing of the autonomy and effectiveness of collective agreements. Based on these findings, the research suggests four policy implications for working time regulations for the Korean content industry. Firstly, it is necessary to more clearly establish the definition and the criteria of working time to ensure workers’ rights. Secondly, a more flexible regulative system should be applied by considering the specificity of each field of the content industry. Thirdly, it is practically difficult to create detailed guidelines of working time regulations covering all the sub-fields of the content industry, so the government needs to consider how to encourage and secure more collective bargaining and agreements within the content industry. Finally, it is necessary to strengthen the effectiveness and regulatory power of the working time regulation
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.016 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".