[Teheran-ro] The Backlash from the ‘End of No-Union Management’

The labor dispute that erupted at Samsung Electronics is not simply a clash over wages. It is the structural backlash created over the past several years, as labor groups and politicians portrayed Samsung’s 'no-union management' as a symbol of entrenched wrongdoing. Around 2020, labor circles and the political establishment defined Samsung’s no-union management as a historic problem that had to be dismantled. Under a pro-labor administration, the slogan of 'ending no-union management' spread through civic groups and was repeated everywhere.
The KCTU even launched a campaign calling for people to 'form a union at Samsung,' and figures from the ruling camp at the time, as well as current ruling-party figures, echoed and encouraged it. In that atmosphere, Samsung’s no-union system was no longer seen as a company-specific management style. It was turned into a social evil that had to be eliminated.
Of course, the three basic labor rights are an undeniable value. The problem is that those who were so eager to break Samsung’s no-union system have shown astonishing irresponsibility when it comes to the costs of labor disputes and the impact on national competitiveness at a global advanced manufacturer.
By focusing only on the symbolism of dismantling no-union management, they pushed aside any serious discussion of the medium- and long-term labor risks that could arise in a core manufacturing industry.
Is Samsung Electronics just an ordinary manufacturer? It is a key pillar of South Korea’s semiconductor industry and a strategic company that helps secure the global memory chip supply chain. A labor-management system tailored to that special role was needed, but no one was able to properly address it. Under those conditions, there was never any reason to expect the dispute to be smoothly resolved. Calls to establish a union were uncompromising, and the government responded with weakness to the resulting reality, which was shaped by reckless indifference to the industry’s conditions. What, then, was the outcome of winning the spirit of the age with the slogan of 'ending no-union management'?
As Samsung Electronics’ union faced a strike threat, the government even considered invoking emergency mediation powers, while the stock market often swung with the outcome of labor talks. Foreign media were busy analyzing how devastating a Samsung Electronics union strike could be for the South Korean economy.
In this situation, those who once criticized Samsung’s no-union management have remained almost silent. The industrial landscape of 2020 and 2026 is vastly different. We need to take a hard, sober look at whether labor slogans rooted in the past are really helpful to industries that now stand at the center of the global economy.
The Samsung Electronics case is only the beginning. If South Korea’s global conglomerates are swept up in union-related risks on a field tilted in favor of labor, who will bear the consequences, and how? It is now urgent to think seriously about where the balance should lie between the competitiveness of core national industries and labor rights.
hjkim01@fnnews.com Reporter