![Minimum Wage Commission Chairman Kwon Soon-won attends the 14th plenary session of the commission at Government Complex Sejong on Tuesday. [Yonhap]](https://wimg.heraldcorp.com/news/cms/2026/07/14/rcv.YNA.20260714.PYH2026071415630001301_P1.jpg)
Labor and management have each submitted up to 10 revised proposals, yet the gap between their demands for next year's minimum wage still stands at 600 won, making it highly likely that the public-interest commissioners will once again present a "deliberation-facilitation range" this year.
The deeper problem is that the criteria used to calculate that range are not spelled out anywhere in the Minimum Wage Act. Because the same economic indicators are applied differently from year to year, the public-interest commissioners' "mediation formula" is expected to face renewed criticism for lacking consistency and predictability.
According to the National Law Information Center, Article 4 of the Minimum Wage Act states that the minimum wage "shall be set by taking into account workers' living costs, wages of similar workers, labor productivity and income distribution." The law, however, contains no provision specifying the criteria by which public-interest commissioners must set the deliberation-facilitation range.
Even so, the deliberation-facilitation range that public-interest commissioners propose serves in effect as the guideline for determining the minimum wage.
When labor and management repeatedly submit revised proposals without finding common ground — as they have this year — the public-interest commissioners present a range within which both sides then offer further revisions and continue final negotiations. The range carries strong weight, yet it operates not under any statute but through the commissioners' informal mediation practice.
On top of that, the criteria the commissioners use to calculate the range change from year to year.
In 2021 and 2022, the "national economic productivity growth rate" — calculated as economic growth plus consumer price inflation minus the increase in employed workers — served in effect as the basis for the final resolution. In 2024, however, the same formula was used to set the upper bound of the deliberation-facilitation range instead. The same economic indicator, in other words, determined the rate of minimum wage increase in some years and merely defined the boundaries of negotiations in others.
Experts say the calculation basis needs to be disclosed more transparently. Critics also argue that applying the same economic indicators in different ways each year has caused the commissioners' mediation criteria to lose consistency. Some have gone so far as to describe the approach as "an earring when hung on an ear, a nose ring when hung on a nose" — meaning the formula is bent to fit whatever outcome is desired.
Amid this, the Lee Jae-myung government has included "improvements to the operation of the Minimum Wage Commission and the criteria for setting the minimum wage" among its state affairs agenda. If this year's minimum wage deliberations again conclude with a public-interest commissioner range and a vote, calls for building a decision-making system grounded in expert input and objective indicators are expected to gain further traction.
Meanwhile, the public-interest commissioners recommended to the government that the Ministry of Employment and Labor establish a "minimum wage system reform task force" in the second half of this year to conduct a comprehensive review and study of the scope of application and the criteria for setting the wage, develop an overall improvement plan, and apply the findings to the next round of minimum wage deliberations.
fact0514@heraldcorp.com
