Is a Click-to-Agree on a Company Intranet Invalid? Lawful Procedures for Changing Work Rules to Introduce a Wage-Peak System

Why Was a 78% Approval Rate Still Invalid? — Explaining Supreme Court Decision 2025다215010

On June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a noteworthy ruling concerning the introduction of a wage-peak system (임금피크제) (Case No. 2025다215010). The core holding is straightforward: even if 78% of workers clicked an "agree" button on the company intranet, this does not constitute "consent by a collective decision-making method" required for a disadvantageous change to work rules (취업규칙 불이익 변경).

What the Law Requires for a Disadvantageous Change to Work Rules

Article 94, Paragraph 1 of the Labor Standards Act (근로기준법 제94조 제1항) requires that, when work rules are changed in a way that is disadvantageous to workers, the consent of the trade union organized by a majority of workers (or, if no such union exists, the consent of a majority of workers) must be obtained. A system that cuts wages — such as a wage-peak system — is a typical example of a disadvantageous change.

The critical point is the method of consent. The Supreme Court has long interpreted this to mean that consent must be given not merely by collecting individual signatures, but through a meeting-style process in which workers can exchange opinions and gather support for or against the change.

Note for foreign workers: Your employment contract may set terms different from the statutory minimum, but the procedural requirements under the Labor Standards Act apply regardless of contract language.

Why Clicking on an Intranet Is Problematic

In this case, the company posted a consent form on the company intranet and collected consent by having workers click individually. Although a high consent rate of 78% was achieved, the Supreme Court held that this procedure was not lawful.

The reason is clear. In an individual-click method on an intranet, there is no process by which workers exchange opinions with one another, express dissenting views, and collectively decide for or against the change. Each person pressing a button alone in front of a screen is nothing more than an aggregation of individual expressions of intent — not a collective decision. No matter how many people agree, if the procedure is wrong, the consent has no legal effect.

Accordingly, the change to work rules for the introduction of the wage-peak system in this case was invalid, and the company remains obligated to pay the wages that were cut as a result of applying the wage-peak system.

What a Lawful Consent Procedure Looks Like

In practice, the following elements must be in place to obtain valid collective consent:

1. Hold a meeting: Convene a meeting — either with all workers together or divided by department or workplace — where genuine exchange of opinions is possible.
2. Provide sufficient information: Explain in advance the content of the change, the reasons for it, and its impact on workers.
3. Guarantee free expression of views: Ensure an environment in which workers can freely express opinions for or against the change.
4. Confirm majority consent: Confirm majority consent through the meeting and keep a written record of the result.

Simply circulating a written consent form or posting one on an intranet is likely to fall short of this standard.

Remedies After a Wage Cut

If a wage-peak system was implemented without a lawful procedure and wages were cut as a result, a worker may claim the full amount of the wages that were cut. Any money not paid within 14 days after retirement accrues delay interest at 20% per annum (Article 37(1)1 of the Labor Standards Act / 근로기준법 제37조 제1항 제1호 and Article 17 of its Enforcement Decree / 근로기준법 시행령 제17조). Since the amendment in force from 23 October 2025, it also applies to wages unpaid while still employed. However, it applies only to wages whose payday falls on or after that date (Article 37(1)2 of the same Act / 같은 항 제2호; Article 2 of the Addenda to Act No. 20520 / 근로기준법 부칙(법률 제20520호) 제2조), and not for any period in which it is recognized as appropriate for the employer to dispute the wages before a court or the Labor Relations Commission (Article 37(3) of the same Act / 같은 조 제3항; Article 18 of its Enforcement Decree / 같은 법 시행령 제18조). Workers may file a wage-arrears complaint with the Ministry of Employment and Labor or claim unpaid wages through a civil lawsuit.

If you want to check whether your wages are being calculated correctly, try the take-home salary calculator at workbear.kr (재주넘는곰). It reflects the 2026 minimum wage (10,320 won per hour) and the current four major insurance contribution rates to give you an accurate take-home figure instantly. If you suspect wage theft, the site also offers an AI search function and a complaint-drafting tool.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific cases, consult a certified labor attorney (노무사) or lawyer.