‘A year in the Coast Guard is 366 days’ senior officer promoted against retirement age controversy

Suspicions have been raised that a senior officer of the Korea Coast Guard was promoted to chief of police after working past the retirement age under the Police Civil Service Act.

There are also concerns that the rank retirement age system, which was introduced to secure administrative efficiency in the organization, is being abused as a means to extend the working period of senior officers who are about to retire.

According to a news report on July 7, A’s name was on the list of those promoted in the recent government reshuffle of senior coast guard officers above the rank of inspector. A chief of police is the equivalent of a major general in the military and is the third rank in the police organization hierarchy, requiring a proposal from the Minister of the Interior and Safety and approval from the president.

Mr. A was promoted to the rank of Inspector General on January 1, 2017. According to Article 30 (Retirement Age), paragraph 1, item 2 of the Police Service Act, the retirement age for police officers is six years.

He was supposed to retire on December 31, 2022, the retirement date for the rank of police officer, according to the Police Civil Service Act and the Civil Service Appointment Order, but his service period was extended by six months. This is because the Coast Guard calculated his retirement date as January 1, 2023.

This was an abuse of the retirement rank system, which states that police officers retire on June 30 if their retirement date is from January to June, and on December 31 if their retirement date is from July to December.

In the end, Chief A’s service period was extended to six years and six months instead of six years, and he received a promotion during this period, as the Coast Guard added a “day” to his retirement age, citing precedents and legal interpretations.

A Coast Guard official explained, “In the past, we have retired those who were appointed on January 1 in June of the following year.” “The retirement date may vary depending on how the relevant laws are interpreted,” he said.

In fact, the retirement date for Officer B, who was promoted to police officer along with Officer A on January 1, 2017, is June 30 this year.

There has been controversy over the retirement date among firefighters before.

In 2017, the Ministry of Public Safety asked the Ministry of Justice for a statutory interpretation on whether the date of promotion, January 1, 2008, should be included when calculating the rank retirement date of a firefighter who was promoted to local firefighter (rank retirement age of 11 years) on January 1, 2008.

The Legal Affairs Bureau concluded that Article 157 of the Civil Code states that the first day of a period is not included when the period is defined as a day, week, month, or year, but that the day of appointment should be included when the period starts at zero o’clock according to the proviso clause, and interpreted the rank retirement date of the local firefighters as December 31, 2018.

When this became known, there were voices of outrage within the Coast Guard organization. “It is unbelievable that personnel changes that should be made in accordance with the law and principles were implemented based on past precedents,” said an officer, pointing out that “personnel changes should be made in principle to correct the organization’s discipline안전놀이터.”

“A culture in which the system of seniority is abused to extend the service period of senior officers should never be allowed to take hold in the organization,” another officer lamented, “It shows the lack of professionalism in the personnel work of the Coast Guard.”

However, the Korean Coast Guard argues that the relevant laws do not clearly define the “retirement date” for rank, and that personnel laws are interpreted in favor of the employee.

It also argued that those who applied the rank retirement age compared to the age retirement age would be at a status disadvantage as they would retire six months earlier.

An official from the Korea Coast Guard said, “In order to avoid disadvantages for those who are promoted, those appointed on January 1 are retired on June 30 of the following year and those appointed on July 1 are retired on December 31 of the following year.” “If you apply the interpretation of the legislature and retire at 0:00 on December 31, there will be a work gap of one day (on the 31st), causing inequality in the retirement date due to the issue of the retirement date,” he explained.

“The interpretation of a statute by the legislative branch does not have ‘legal binding force,'” he said, adding that “the central administrative agency in charge of the statute may enforce it differently in consideration of specific facts.”