abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeblueskyburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfilterflaggenderglobeglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptriangletwitteruniversalitywebwhatsappxIcons / Social / YouTube

このページは 日本語 では利用できません。English で表示されています

コンテンツは以下の言語で利用可能です: English, 한국어

記事

2025年7月23日

著者:
Ju-Hwan Hong, News Tapa

S. Korea: Coupang settles five-year unfair dismissal case with gag clause in agreement

[Unofficial translation provided by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre]

“After dragging out five-year unfair dismissal lawsuit, Coupang ‘settles’… settlement includes a non-disclosure clause”, 23 July 2025

Coupang has reached a settlement with two workers five years after their dismissal for alleged misconduct, according to an investigation by Newstapa. In 2020, Coupang dismissed two employees who had criticised poor COVID-19 safety conditions at the company’s logistics centres.

…The sole reason presented by Coupang for the dismissal was that the workers had “criticised the company.”

…In May this year, while the appeal case was still ongoing, Coupang expressed willingness to settle. The company reportedly offered a settlement payment to Mr Kang and Mr Ko in exchange for dropping the case.

…According to Newstapa’s findings, the settlement agreement—signed by Coupang and the two workers—contained a clause stating that “the existence and details of the agreement shall not be disclosed externally.”

Newstapa sent a formal inquiry to Coupang asking: ▲ why the company agreed to settle with Mr Kang and Mr Ko; ▲ whether Coupang still considers the dismissals to have been justified; and ▲ whether the non-disclosure clause in the agreement was inserted at Coupang’s request. Coupang did not respond.

タイムライン