Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Precedent on “Expectation of Conversion (Refusal to Convert Head Nurse to Regular Position)” (Unfair Dismissal 384)
- Date2026/04/19 04:08
- Read 175
[Case Information]
This case is a precedent in which the issue of “expectation of conversion (refusal to convert a head nurse to a regular position)” was resolved by upholding the first-instance decision.
Adjudicating Body: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1677 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re‑examination of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.02.12 · Disposition: First‑instance decision upheld
Summary of Key Issues:
A. Whether an expectation right to conversion to a regular position exists
The employer argued that conversion to a regular position is a matter of managerial discretion and therefore no expectation right to conversion exists. However, (i) the job posting stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” and specified that the head nurse position the worker would perform was subject to conversion to a regular position; (ii) on this basis, it appears that the worker formed an expectation, grounded in the employment contract, that she would be converted to a regular position upon completion of the two‑month probationary period; (iii) over the past five years, of 1,685 employees subject to evaluation, 1,601 (95%) had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties that, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the worker would be converted to an employee with no fixed term, and therefore recognized an expectation right to conversion to a regular position.
B. Whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position
Given (i) the worker’s words and conduct that undermined organizational stability and teamwork and thereby damaged the workplace atmosphere; (ii) the fact that, despite being pointed out, the worker failed to improve her “lack of emotional nursing,” which is required of nurses; and (iii) the fact that the worker’s evaluation results fell short of the criteria for conversion to a regular position, and there were no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a hospital hired a fixed‑term worker for the position of head nurse, informing her that she would be “converted to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation.” When the hospital refused to convert her to a regular position on the basis of the evaluation results, the worker claimed unfair dismissal and applied to the Labor Relations Commission for relief. The employer prevailed at first instance, and although the worker sought re‑examination, the Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first‑instance decision and ruled in favor of the employer.
The key issues in this unfair dismissal and Labor Relations Commission procedure were how to view the expectation right to conversion to an indefinite‑term contract and the reasonableness of refusing such conversion. The case is closely related to collective redundancies and fixed‑term employment disputes, which Labor Law Firm Law& frequently handles.
The issue in this case is whether a fixed‑term head nurse, whose conversion to a regular position was contemplated, can be recognized as having an expectation right to conversion to an indefinite‑term contract, and, if so, whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing such conversion.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issues in this case are, first, whether, in light of the job posting and actual operational practices, the worker can be recognized as having a “legitimate expectation right to conversion” that she could be converted to a regular position upon completion of the probationary period.
Second, even if an expectation right to conversion is recognized, whether the refusal to convert to a regular position—based on circumstances such as the worker’s words and conduct undermining organizational stability and teamwork, insufficient emotional nursing, and failure to meet the required evaluation score—constitutes a “reasonable ground” that is acceptable under social norms.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The adjudicating panel in this case found that a relationship of trust had been formed that the worker would be converted to an indefinite‑term (regular) position upon satisfaction of certain conditions, given that the job posting explicitly stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” that the head nurse position was specifically designated as subject to conversion to a regular position, and that approximately 95% of those evaluated over the past five years had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions.
Accordingly, while the worker was recognized as having an expectation right to conversion to a regular position, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position, based on: the worker’s words and conduct undermining organizational stability and teamwork; the failure to improve, despite being pointed out, the lack of emotional nursing required of nurses; and the fact that the worker’s personnel evaluation results fell short of the conversion criteria, with no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity.
The dismissal in this case was therefore held not to constitute unfair dismissal, on the ground that even where an expectation right to conversion to an indefinite‑term contract is recognized, if there are objective and reasonable grounds for refusing conversion, the refusal cannot be deemed unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s perspective, it should be borne in mind that an expectation right to conversion to a regular position may be recognized based on the job posting, employment contract, and the employer’s conversion practices.
However, even where an expectation right to conversion is recognized, if there are problems with the worker’s performance evaluation results or work attitude, and there is objective evidence thereof, refusal of conversion may be justified. Accordingly, during the probation and evaluation period, it is important not only to improve and manage work competence, but also to continuously improve and manage attitude elements required for the job, such as teamwork and emotional service.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, when operating fixed‑term employment on the premise of “conversion to a regular position,” it should be recognized that the job posting, employment contract, internal rules, and actual conversion practices directly affect whether an expectation right to conversion is formed.
To justify refusal of conversion, the employer should record specific reasons such as the worker’s lack of job competence or maladjustment to the organization in accordance with concrete evaluation criteria, and should establish a personnel evaluation system in advance that allows the employer to explain the fairness and objectivity of the evaluation process.
To prevail in this type of case, it is necessary to have practical capabilities to accurately understand the legal principles governing expectation rights to conversion and renewal of indefinite‑term contracts, and to systematically organize and prove the relevant facts—such as evaluation materials, operational practices, and communication records—in line with those legal principles.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether an expectation right to conversion to a regular position exists
The employer argued that conversion to a regular position is a matter of managerial discretion and therefore no expectation right to conversion exists. However, (i) the job posting stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” and specified that the head nurse position the worker would perform was subject to conversion to a regular position; (ii) on this basis, it appears that the worker formed an expectation, grounded in the employment contract, that she would be converted to a regular position upon completion of the two‑month probationary period; and (iii) over the past five years, of 1,685 employees subject to evaluation, 1,601 (95%) had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties that, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the worker would be converted to an employee with no fixed term, and therefore recognized an expectation right to conversion to a regular position.
B. Whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position
In light of (i) the worker’s words and conduct that undermined organizational stability and teamwork and thereby damaged the workplace atmosphere; (ii) the fact that, despite being pointed out, the worker failed to improve her “lack of emotional nursing,” which is required of nurses; and (iii) the fact that the worker’s evaluation results fell short of the criteria for conversion to a regular position, and there were no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
A. Whether an expectation right to conversion to a regular position exists
The employer argued that conversion to a regular position is a matter of managerial discretion and therefore no expectation right to conversion exists. However, (i) the job posting stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” and specified that the head nurse position the worker would perform was subject to conversion to a regular position; (ii) on this basis, it appears that the worker formed an expectation, grounded in the employment contract, that she would be converted to a regular position upon completion of the two‑month probationary period; and (iii) over the past five years, of 1,685 employees subject to evaluation, 1,601 (95%) had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties that, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the worker would be converted to an employee with no fixed term, and therefore recognized an expectation right to conversion to a regular position.
B. Whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position
In light of (i) the worker’s words and conduct that undermined organizational stability and teamwork and thereby damaged the workplace atmosphere; (ii) the fact that, despite being pointed out, the worker failed to improve her “lack of emotional nursing,” which is required of nurses; and (iii) the fact that the worker’s evaluation results fell short of the criteria for conversion to a regular position, and there were no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position. /
[See More Related Precedents]
- “‘Non‑Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent” – Date of Decision: – Disposition: First‑instance decision upheld
- “‘Burden of Proof · Equity (Bus Driver Traffic Accident · Embezzlement Suspicion)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
- “‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Collective Redundancy (Workout Company)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of conversion (refusal to convert head nurse to regular position), dismissal during probation, personnel evaluation · poor performance, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong‑dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This article is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Precedents” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “‘Burden of Proof · Equity (Bus Driver Traffic Accident · Embezzlement Suspicion)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent,” in a new window.
※ The list of precedents related to expectation of conversion (refusal to convert head nurse to regular position) can be viewed together on the “Expectation of Conversion (Refusal to Convert Head Nurse to Regular Position) Precedent List” page.
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a precedent in which the issue of “expectation of conversion (refusal to convert a head nurse to a regular position)” was resolved by upholding the first-instance decision.
Adjudicating Body: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1677 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re‑examination of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.02.12 · Disposition: First‑instance decision upheld
Summary of Key Issues:
A. Whether an expectation right to conversion to a regular position exists
The employer argued that conversion to a regular position is a matter of managerial discretion and therefore no expectation right to conversion exists. However, (i) the job posting stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” and specified that the head nurse position the worker would perform was subject to conversion to a regular position; (ii) on this basis, it appears that the worker formed an expectation, grounded in the employment contract, that she would be converted to a regular position upon completion of the two‑month probationary period; (iii) over the past five years, of 1,685 employees subject to evaluation, 1,601 (95%) had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties that, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the worker would be converted to an employee with no fixed term, and therefore recognized an expectation right to conversion to a regular position.
B. Whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position
Given (i) the worker’s words and conduct that undermined organizational stability and teamwork and thereby damaged the workplace atmosphere; (ii) the fact that, despite being pointed out, the worker failed to improve her “lack of emotional nursing,” which is required of nurses; and (iii) the fact that the worker’s evaluation results fell short of the criteria for conversion to a regular position, and there were no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a hospital hired a fixed‑term worker for the position of head nurse, informing her that she would be “converted to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation.” When the hospital refused to convert her to a regular position on the basis of the evaluation results, the worker claimed unfair dismissal and applied to the Labor Relations Commission for relief. The employer prevailed at first instance, and although the worker sought re‑examination, the Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first‑instance decision and ruled in favor of the employer.
The key issues in this unfair dismissal and Labor Relations Commission procedure were how to view the expectation right to conversion to an indefinite‑term contract and the reasonableness of refusing such conversion. The case is closely related to collective redundancies and fixed‑term employment disputes, which Labor Law Firm Law& frequently handles.
The issue in this case is whether a fixed‑term head nurse, whose conversion to a regular position was contemplated, can be recognized as having an expectation right to conversion to an indefinite‑term contract, and, if so, whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing such conversion.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issues in this case are, first, whether, in light of the job posting and actual operational practices, the worker can be recognized as having a “legitimate expectation right to conversion” that she could be converted to a regular position upon completion of the probationary period.
Second, even if an expectation right to conversion is recognized, whether the refusal to convert to a regular position—based on circumstances such as the worker’s words and conduct undermining organizational stability and teamwork, insufficient emotional nursing, and failure to meet the required evaluation score—constitutes a “reasonable ground” that is acceptable under social norms.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The adjudicating panel in this case found that a relationship of trust had been formed that the worker would be converted to an indefinite‑term (regular) position upon satisfaction of certain conditions, given that the job posting explicitly stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” that the head nurse position was specifically designated as subject to conversion to a regular position, and that approximately 95% of those evaluated over the past five years had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions.
Accordingly, while the worker was recognized as having an expectation right to conversion to a regular position, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position, based on: the worker’s words and conduct undermining organizational stability and teamwork; the failure to improve, despite being pointed out, the lack of emotional nursing required of nurses; and the fact that the worker’s personnel evaluation results fell short of the conversion criteria, with no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity.
The dismissal in this case was therefore held not to constitute unfair dismissal, on the ground that even where an expectation right to conversion to an indefinite‑term contract is recognized, if there are objective and reasonable grounds for refusing conversion, the refusal cannot be deemed unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s perspective, it should be borne in mind that an expectation right to conversion to a regular position may be recognized based on the job posting, employment contract, and the employer’s conversion practices.
However, even where an expectation right to conversion is recognized, if there are problems with the worker’s performance evaluation results or work attitude, and there is objective evidence thereof, refusal of conversion may be justified. Accordingly, during the probation and evaluation period, it is important not only to improve and manage work competence, but also to continuously improve and manage attitude elements required for the job, such as teamwork and emotional service.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, when operating fixed‑term employment on the premise of “conversion to a regular position,” it should be recognized that the job posting, employment contract, internal rules, and actual conversion practices directly affect whether an expectation right to conversion is formed.
To justify refusal of conversion, the employer should record specific reasons such as the worker’s lack of job competence or maladjustment to the organization in accordance with concrete evaluation criteria, and should establish a personnel evaluation system in advance that allows the employer to explain the fairness and objectivity of the evaluation process.
To prevail in this type of case, it is necessary to have practical capabilities to accurately understand the legal principles governing expectation rights to conversion and renewal of indefinite‑term contracts, and to systematically organize and prove the relevant facts—such as evaluation materials, operational practices, and communication records—in line with those legal principles.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether an expectation right to conversion to a regular position exists
The employer argued that conversion to a regular position is a matter of managerial discretion and therefore no expectation right to conversion exists. However, (i) the job posting stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” and specified that the head nurse position the worker would perform was subject to conversion to a regular position; (ii) on this basis, it appears that the worker formed an expectation, grounded in the employment contract, that she would be converted to a regular position upon completion of the two‑month probationary period; and (iii) over the past five years, of 1,685 employees subject to evaluation, 1,601 (95%) had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties that, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the worker would be converted to an employee with no fixed term, and therefore recognized an expectation right to conversion to a regular position.
B. Whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position
In light of (i) the worker’s words and conduct that undermined organizational stability and teamwork and thereby damaged the workplace atmosphere; (ii) the fact that, despite being pointed out, the worker failed to improve her “lack of emotional nursing,” which is required of nurses; and (iii) the fact that the worker’s evaluation results fell short of the criteria for conversion to a regular position, and there were no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
A. Whether an expectation right to conversion to a regular position exists
The employer argued that conversion to a regular position is a matter of managerial discretion and therefore no expectation right to conversion exists. However, (i) the job posting stated “conversion to a regular position after a 2‑month short‑term evaluation,” and specified that the head nurse position the worker would perform was subject to conversion to a regular position; (ii) on this basis, it appears that the worker formed an expectation, grounded in the employment contract, that she would be converted to a regular position upon completion of the two‑month probationary period; and (iii) over the past five years, of 1,685 employees subject to evaluation, 1,601 (95%) had their contracts extended or were converted to regular positions. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties that, upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the worker would be converted to an employee with no fixed term, and therefore recognized an expectation right to conversion to a regular position.
B. Whether there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position
In light of (i) the worker’s words and conduct that undermined organizational stability and teamwork and thereby damaged the workplace atmosphere; (ii) the fact that, despite being pointed out, the worker failed to improve her “lack of emotional nursing,” which is required of nurses; and (iii) the fact that the worker’s evaluation results fell short of the criteria for conversion to a regular position, and there were no circumstances indicating that the evaluation lacked fairness or objectivity, the Commission held that there was a reasonable ground for refusing conversion to a regular position. /
[See More Related Precedents]
- “‘Non‑Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent” – Date of Decision: – Disposition: First‑instance decision upheld
- “‘Burden of Proof · Equity (Bus Driver Traffic Accident · Embezzlement Suspicion)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
- “‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Collective Redundancy (Workout Company)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of conversion (refusal to convert head nurse to regular position), dismissal during probation, personnel evaluation · poor performance, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong‑dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This article is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Precedents” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “‘Burden of Proof · Equity (Bus Driver Traffic Accident · Embezzlement Suspicion)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent,” in a new window.
※ The list of precedents related to expectation of conversion (refusal to convert head nurse to regular position) can be viewed together on the “Expectation of Conversion (Refusal to Convert Head Nurse to Regular Position) Precedent List” page.
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
