Blind Spots in Labor Law
Protection for Native English Instructors (as of 2026)

Bongsoo
Jung (Labor Attorney at KangNam Labor Law Firm)

I. Introduction

In order to equip the country to be more globally
competitive, English proficiency is essential. To this end, the cheapest way to
improve one’s English skills is to regularly attend English conversation classes
taught by a native English instructor in Korea. The immigration data from the
Department of Justice indicate that the number of native English instructors
working in Korea has remained relatively constant at 13,000 in recent years,
with this number expected to be maintained in the future. Native English
teachers are highly educated with bachelors’ degrees or higher from their home
countries, where English is their mother tongue. Accordingly, it is necessary
to induce competent, qualified native English instructors to stay longer by
strengthening their legal protections. As all native English instructors are
foreigners and have fixed-term contracts, they are not well-protected by Korean
labor laws. In this article, I would like to point out the problems they face
due to the weakness of the legal protection granted to them. 

II. Unfair Dismissal

1. Difficulties
in getting reinstated in reality

Korea’s immigration
law trumps labor law for Native English instructors because they entered Korea for
employment. In cases where native English
instructors are dismissed without justifiable cause, they can apply to the
Labor Relations Commission for remedy. However, as native English instructors can
stay only under the work-permission visa according to immigration law, they face
many limitations in the course of seeking remedy. They may find their visa has
expired or been cancelled while they are fighting unfair dismissal through the
Labor Relations Commission. Even should the Commission order an employer to
reinstate a native English instructor, they must go through the complicated
process of getting a new E-2 visa (foreign language instructor visa). Many
instructors do not wish to return to an employer who has mistreated them, so
these cases often result in monetary settlement and an instructor who
returns to their home countries.
 

2. Non-fixed term contract
impossible after renewal of the fixed-term contract for two years

Native English instructors remain fixed-term employees, even
when they have worked in excess of two years at the same job. Korean employees,
on the other hand, must become regular employees if their employer wishes to
keep them, but this protection is not afforded to foreigners.  

3. Requesting a letter of release is regarded as agreeing to
termination of employment

In cases where native
English instructors find employment with another business during their original
contract period, they need to receive a Letter of Release from the institute
owner and submit it to the Immigration Office with an Applicationfor Workplace Transfer. If an instructor has been dismissed,
it is very difficult to get a new job without this Letter of Release due to the
complicated process of having a new E-2 visa issued. This, plus the fact that
the Letter of Release is required to continue staying in Korea, means the
dismissed instructor usually requests a Letter of Release from the employer who
dismissed them. The Labor Relations Commission and the court often view such
requests for a Letter of Release as “agreed termination,” or “implied agreed
termination.”

III. Wages and Working Hours

1. Statutory severance pay

The employer shall pay employees
who resign after serving one year or longer, 30 days’ average wages per each
continuous service year, except for part-time employees whose average
contractual working hours per week are fewer than 15 hours for four consecutive
weeks. Severance pay is a system that other countries do not have, which is to
be paid later according to the Korean wage structure. Employers of native
English teachers (who are not accustomed to the severance pay system) have at
times created contracts in an attempt to allow the employer to avoid paying severance
pay, and in some
cases, have terminated the employment contract just ahead of one year.
Generally institute owners recognize their obligation to pay severance pay, but
some employers still find ways to avoid paying it, which is in violation of the
Labor Standards Act.    

A.   
Cases
where the employment contract has been renewed every 10 months

“A International Foreign School” in Seoul had
employment contracts with its native English instructors for 10 month periods, excluding
the summer vacation, in
an attempt to evade their obligation to pay severance pay. Their native English instructors had continued
working for them for four years on average, with their contracts renewed
continuously unless their teaching skills were significantly inferior. Once they
resigned from this school and did not receive their severance pay, 7 native
English instructors brought a claim for unpaid severance pay to the Labor
Office. The school continued to refuse to pay severance pay until the Supreme
Court made it clear that the employer was obligated to pay it.[1] 

 B. Freelance contracts

Only employees who have
provided continuous labor service for one year or longer can receive severance
pay, while independent contractors or freelancers are excluded. Even though
native English instructors agree to freelance contracts rather than employment
contracts, if they work under the employer’s supervision and control and the
characteristics of their income are similar to that
of wages paid as remuneration for labor service, they shall be regarded as
employees, and the employer shall pay severance pay.

 C. In cases where an employment contract has been terminated before
one year of service

If a native English teacher is dismissed one
or two months prior to expiration of the contract period, they are not
protected by Korean labor law. As employees who have not worked for one full year are not entitled to severance pay,
if the employees are terminated with advance notice of dismissal just before
expiration of the contract period, they do not fall under the protection of
labor law. In these cases, the returning airfare stipulated
in the contract is not paid, nor is severance pay. As their visa will be cancelled
at the same time, time will be short for them to find another job before they
must leave the country.

2. Working hours
Controversial issues in relation to working hours are whether
all hours that native English teachers are required to stay in the institute should
be calculated into wage or whether only teaching hours should. ① In general, if the employment contract stipulates, “Monthly wages are
2.2 million won. Working hours are six hours per day, 30 hours per week, including
preparation time for classes”, this can be
interpreted as a mutual agreement that working hours should include class time
and preparation time. In such a case, paid class preparation time shall be
limited to the maximum weekly working hours allowed by law, which is 40 hours
per week total.② However,
if the employment contract stipulates, “Class hours
shall be 30 hours per week and 120 hours per month. If the employee agrees to
work overtime, the institute shall pay 15,000 won per each additional hour”,
then the mandatory time to prepare for classes shall be considered as overtime
and additional payment calculated as overtime wages. The Labor Standards Act
also agrees with this, as it stipulates, “Waiting hours the
worker spends while under the employer's direction and supervision for work
shall be regarded as working hours.”

IV. Conclusion  

Protection
for native English instructors, in terms of labor law, is considerably limited for
two reasons: 1) they are foreigners staying by permission for employment
according to immigration law, and 2) they are considered short-term employees
providing services for a fixed time period. Many native English instructors
have faced extreme difficulty in receiving remedy for unfair dismissal, and often
return home after receiving minimal compensation. Competent native English
instructors should be encouraged to stay long-term and an environment provided where
they receive adequate protection under Korea’s labor laws. As the most basic
requirement for this purpose, if a native English instructor is unfairly
dismissed, they should be allowed to obtain a D-10 employment visa so they can work
elsewhere without needing the previous employer to issue a Letter of Release.
In addition, in cases where someone is staying under a Lawsuit Visa (G-1) to
pursue a case of unfair dismissal, a D-10 employment visa should be issued to
the instructor if he/she wins the lawsuit.