This study aims at discussing problems of the negotiation system of teachers' associations in Korea and ways to improve it. The negotiation system of teachers' association in Korea has a dual structure due to the immoderate dualization policy of the government and the structural problems of the labor law which permits the collective negotiation right to the labor union alone. The negotiation of the teachers' associations is inadequate for establishment of rules and stabilization of labor-management relations performed in non-official circles. This is attributable to particularities of education and properties of public section. In the United States, the discussion was implemented as the profession negotiation and the collective negotiation argument; however, to learn mutual advantages since the 1980s will be a great help to our understandng. I suggest improvements of teachers' collective negotiation in Korea as follows: First, improve the dual negotiation structure. Dualization of the negotiation structure resulted from the closed thought that any negotiation right but labor relation law cannot be permitted and the failure of the government policy which had been forced with no regard to the fact that the existing teachers' associations secure particular forms of negotiation rights. To solve this problem, we must abandon the closed thought that anyone but a labor union can never own a negotiation right and cast away the prejudice that the labor union system can't reflect the particularities of education. The government should unify the laws of teachers' association establishment bases or negotiation windows at least. The government and teachers' associations are required to have a positive conversation with each other in order to establish the negotiation system for reducing negotiation costs and increasing efficiency; in particular, teachers' associations need to abandon their vested rights. Second, note that the educational policy, which belongs to the public field, is necessarily hard to implement, anti devise the efficient participation system, most of all, to overcome the difficulties in the public field. To be actually effective in the labor-management conference in the public field, therefore, it is important to persuade and be promised by the people. It is not persuasive even in the aspect of the educational right for representatives and government officials to simply sit face to face with each other in order to agree on the whole range of the educational policy and force to implement the agreement. For the negotiation on the policies, at least the educational policy, therefore, it is required to come to an agreement at the lively discussion in which all the educational subjects concerned with interests participate and desirable to systematize it. Third, to make efficient the negotiation on the matters concerned with teachers' status, that is, improvement of wages or working conditions, it is desirable to consider the current status security system, etc. The efficiency of the negotiation is inversely proportional to the level of the status security. The negotiation can be most efficient in case that the status of a teacher, for example in the contract system, is neither standardized nor defined uniformly. Therefore, because a teacher is currently a government official, it should be considered that the negotiation to improve ages and working conditions must be limitedly efficient.